Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions

  • 15 Jun 2018

    香港特別行政區 訴 CHAN YIN SHING

    Citation
    [2018] HKCA 355
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC87/2017

    The trial judge committed reviewable error by improperly rejecting and inadequately testing the defence expert's evidence of mild intellectual disability and adaptive impairment, and by preventing full exploration of the reliability of the tests; that error undermined the safety of the conviction because the appellant's mental condition bore directly on the voluntariness and reliability of his admissions and the weight to be given to the identification evidence, therefore the conviction was quashed.

    • Identification evidence
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Expert evidence on mental capacity
    • Safety of conviction
    • Trial judge's discretionary assessment of evidence

  • 15 Sept 2017

    香港特別行政區 訴 黎曉亮

    Citation
    香港特別行政區 訴 黎曉亮
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC289/2016

    The trial judge's findings that the applicant voluntarily made admissions, that he entered the private platform (constituting entry to part of the building), and that his intent was to steal were supported by evidence (PW3's observations, admissions, tools found) and were not plainly wrong; appellate deference applies so the application for leave to appeal against conviction is refused; additionally the court ordered that one month of custody during the application period not be counted towards sentence under s83W.

    • Burglary/housebreaking (entrance to part of building)
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Appellate standard of review of factual findings
    • Leave to appeal
    • Sentence calculation (time served)

  • 17 Apr 2012

    香港特別行政區 訴 HKPP

    Citation
    香港特別行政區 訴 HKPP
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC63/2011

    The Court concluded the trial judge failed to address significant unresolved credibility issues—notably PW2's conduct and the implications for PW1 and PW4—such that the conviction was rendered unsafe; accordingly the appeal was allowed and the conviction quashed.

    • Drug trafficking
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Police inducement and corruption
    • Witness credibility
    • Safety of conviction

  • 17 Mar 2009

    HKSAR v. YUK MAN CHUN AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    HKSAR v. YUK MAN CHUN AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC420/2007

    No appealable error was demonstrated: the trial judge correctly directed the jury on the law of conspiracy, burden and standard of proof, properly dealt with accomplice evidence given under immunity and with contested admissions; the allegations of impropriety, misdirection and ineffective assistance lacked substance, so the applications for leave to appeal were dismissed.

    • Conspiracy to commit forcible detention
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Accomplice evidence and immunity
    • Jury directions
    • Grounds of appeal

  • 22 Mar 1974

    CHENG PAK HEI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    CHENG PAK HEI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC42/1973

    The first applicant's conviction was quashed because the judge was not entitled to conclude that the post-charge answer admitted against him was voluntary given its close temporal proximity to earlier statements the judge had rejected as unreliable, and that admitted statement inevitably influenced the jury; by contrast the appellate court found the trial directions on manslaughter and accomplice evidence adequate, the confessions of the second to fourth appellants were rightly admitted as voluntary, and although the judge intervened excessively, that did not produce prejudice sufficient to r…

    • Murder
    • Manslaughter
    • Joint enterprise/common design
    • Accomplice evidence and corroboration
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Jury directions

  • 14 Feb 1969

    CHAN MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    CHAN MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC762/1968

    The appeals were dismissed because the cautioned statements, admitted as voluntary, provided abundant evidence that the appellants shared a common intention to inflict grievous bodily harm; the trial judge's directions were legally adequate and there was no proper evidential basis to leave self‑defence to the jury in respect of the fourth accused.

    • Murder
    • Manslaughter
    • Common design/joint enterprise
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Self‑defence
    • Jury direction

  • 8 Apr 1968

    TSUI SHEUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    TSUI SHEUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC705/1967

    The convictions were upheld because the Crown led ample evidence of manufacture and possession (physical traces, keys, contemporaneous manufacture) and no credible evidence or explanation was put forward to rebut the statutory presumption of guilty knowledge; any defects in jury directions or procedural errors were held to be immaterial and did not cause a miscarriage of justice, so the proviso in Section 81 of the Criminal Procedure Code was applied to dismiss the applications for leave to appeal.

    • Manufacture of dangerous drugs
    • Possession and joint possession
    • Statutory presumption of guilty knowledge
    • Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions
    • Identification evidence
    • Misdirection and proviso application