Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Combined approach to sentencing

Legal area

Court

20 Mar 2020

HKSAR v. MA SHU-KEUNG

Citation

[2020] HKCA 170
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC48/2019

Leave to appeal was refused on the challenge to the notional 9‑year starting point because the combined approach and enhancements for a substantial packaging/trafficking operation and prior offending made the starting point supportable; leave was granted to Ma on the discrete legal question whether and to what extent a sentencing court may take into account that a defendant gave evidence for a co‑defendant and was disbelieved when reducing the guilty plea discount.
27 Nov 2019

HKSAR v. ISLAM S M MAJHARUL

Citation

[2019] HKCA 1307
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC67/2019

The judge erred in methodology by applying the ecstasy sentencing guideline to the total quantity of narcotic (530.96g) instead of to the actual quantity of ecstasy (479.26g); correct methodology when using the combined approach is to apply the relevant guideline to the actual quantity of the identified base drug and then make an upward adjustment to account for other drugs, with cross‑checks (absurdity, conversion and ratio tests) informing the adjustment; leave to appeal against sentence was granted and the matter should proceed to the Court of Appeal for resentencing.
30 Mar 2016

HKSAR v. YAN MEI YEE

Citation

HKSAR v. YAN MEI YEE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC403/2015

The Court found no arguable ground of appeal: the judge correctly applied the combined approach, adopted a defensible starting point for the methamphetamine component, permissibly enhanced the sentence to reflect the heroin component and multiple drugs, and properly applied a one-third discount for the guilty plea; accordingly leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
27 May 2014

HKSAR v. SIDDIQUE SHAHID

Citation

HKSAR v. SIDDIQUE SHAHID
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC386/2012

The Court held the trial judge correctly set a 17-year starting point for the trafficking count, the 30% discount for the applicant's late guilty plea was generous and no further discount was due for information that proved useless; the disparity with the co-defendant's lesser sentence was justified by the co-defendant's offer to assist the prosecution, and therefore leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.
4 Jun 2010

HKSAR v. HO CHAK MING

Citation

HKSAR v. HO CHAK MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC316/2009

The combined approach should be applied; the judge's baseline sentencing for the methamphetamine was appropriate but required limited adjustment to reflect the ketamine by altering which portion of counts ran consecutively, resulting in quashing the 18 months consecutive from Count 2 and instead ordering 12 months of Count 3 consecutive to Count 1; overall sentence reduced to 12 years 3 months.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. MA SHU-KEUNG

HKSAR v. ISLAM S M MAJHARUL

HKSAR v. YAN MEI YEE

HKSAR v. SIDDIQUE SHAHID

HKSAR v. HO CHAK MING