Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Validity of guilty plea

Legal area

Court

11 Jan 2018

香港特別行政區訴歐文及另二人

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 14
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA590/2016

The Court held that, applying fairness and public‑justice principles, the appellants' guilty pleas entered without adequate legal advice and absent opportunity to address material enforcement procedure and disclosure issues were ineffective; therefore the pleas could be set aside, the subsequent magistrate's refusal to allow withdrawal could not stand, convictions and sentences were quashed and the matter remitted for rehearing and retrial before another magistrate.
25 Jan 2016

香港特別行政區訴李麗

Citation

香港特別行政區訴李麗
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA745/2015

The court held the guilty pleas were valid because they were entered voluntarily with legal representation and with agreement to the factual basis; none of the Wong Chi Yuk exceptions applied. The magistrate properly obtained and considered probation and detox reports and the detoxification order was a justified sentencing decision; both conviction and sentence were upheld.
23 Feb 2006

HKSAR v. FUNG KAM DICK ANDREW

Citation

HKSAR v. FUNG KAM DICK ANDREW
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA23/2006

The appellant's admissions established possession of the items but only an intent to use them for self-defence; that does not satisfy the second element of section 17 Summary Offences Ordinance (intent to use for an unlawful purpose), therefore the facts admitted did not amount to the charged offence and the conviction under s17 must be quashed; notwithstanding the quashed conviction the court may, exercising powers under s119 of the Magistrates Ordinance and s45 of the Mental Health Ordinance on the basis the appellant did the act, make a hospital order and a four month hospital order was ap…
2 Mar 2005

HKSAR v. LALCHADANI, VINDU NANIK

Citation

HKSAR v. LALCHADANI, VINDU NANIK
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA52/2005

The guilty plea was set aside because the transcript indicated the plea may not have been the result of a deliberate and informed decision and the mitigation raised a potential defence under section 63(5) which the magistrate should have allowed to be tested at trial; therefore conviction and sentence were quashed and a retrial ordered.
9 Oct 1975

MA KAM WING v. THE QUEEN

Citation

MA KAM WING v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC718/1975

The magistrate validly exercised his power under s.104 to review his earlier acceptance of guilty pleas, set aside that acceptance and permit reversal of pleas; therefore no conviction or sentence remained to be appealed and the appeal was dismissed with the matter remitted for trial.

Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 歐文及另二人

香港特別行政區 訴 李麗

HKSAR v. FUNG KAM DICK ANDREW

HKSAR v. LALCHADANI, VINDU NANIK

MA KAM WING v. THE QUEEN

香港特別行政區訴歐文及另二人

香港特別行政區訴李麗