8 Jan 2016
The Magistrate applied the Court of Appeal guideline in HKSAR v Mok Cho Tik to impose 4 months imprisonment for possession of 0.08 g methamphetamine; there was no basis for appellate interference, the appeal had no prospect of success, and the court granted leave to abandon and dismissed the appeal.
19 Nov 2002
The magistrate properly selected a starting point at the low end of the established nine to eighteen month range, applied a one‑third discount for the guilty plea resulting in a six‑month sentence, and there were no grounds for the appellate court to interfere; the appeal is dismissed.
5 Jun 2002
The appeal was allowed in part because the trial magistrate failed to apply the customary one‑third guilty plea discount to the 12‑month sentence for possession; the sentence for possession was reduced to eight months and the concurrency/consecutivity adjusted to produce a total effective sentence of 11 months.
3 Dec 1997
The Court held that the two burglaries involved distinct acts of entry and theft so could be treated separately for sentencing; the three-year starting point for each burglary was not excessive in context; the trial judge adequately considered mitigation and the applicant's circumstances but the seriousness of the offences warranted immediate custodial sentences; probation was inappropriate; therefore the application for leave to appeal against sentence was rejected.
21 Mar 1985
The trial judge's findings that the police witnesses were reliable in all material respects and that the appellant was deliberately dishonest were open on the evidence; no error in the judge's approach justified overturning the conviction, therefore the application for leave to appeal against conviction must be dismissed.
13 Jul 1970
Given the appellant's lengthy record and limited prospects of rehabilitation but recognising that a substantial term of imprisonment would likely have little rehabilitative value, the appellate court held the original 9 months sentence was excessive and reduced it to 3 months to mark the offence proportionately.
7 Mar 1969
Allow appeal in respect of one robbery conviction because the magistrate failed to give sufficient consideration to mitigating factors (notably apparent contrition and that offences were unreported); reduce each robbery sentence to nine months consecutive; affirm other sentences including defilement, triad membership and unlawful possession of dangerous drugs; resulting total effective imprisonment two years and five months.