Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal refused out-of-time leave to appeal sentence for two drug-trafficking appellants, holding they were not “in the system” for revised guidelines.
The Court of Appeal refused an out-of-time leave application against a 10-year drug-trafficking sentence, holding the judge properly applied the sentencing guidelines and relevant mitigation.
The judge correctly treated the forfeiture application as a civil proceeding, found sufficient prima facie evidence linking the cash to the drug offence (packaging, drug quantity/value, appellant's conduct and possessions), and properly rejected inconsistent, unsworn explanations by the appellant; therefore the forfeiture order was properly made and the leave application to appeal that order is unarguable.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal refused to treat the applicant’s abandoned sentencing appeal as a nullity, holding she understood the consequences and would not have gained materially in any event.
The court ordered forfeiture of cash found on a drug courier, holding it was used in connection with trafficking under section 56(1) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.
The trial judge's factual findings and inferences — based on admission of purchase, the timing and location, the quantity and retail packaging of the drugs, their accessibility in the vehicle and the applicant's conduct — were reasonable and sufficiently support the sole inference of possession for trafficking; there was no error warranting appellate intervention, therefore leave to appeal against conviction is refused.
Source excerpt
The Court of First Instance ordered forfeiture of a mobile phone, two SIM cards and HK$3,630 after finding they were connected to drug trafficking.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against sentence for drug trafficking, finding the starting point, enhancements and guilty plea discount were appropriate.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal conviction and sentence in a drug trafficking case, refused bail pending appeal, and warned about loss of time.
The court accepted the uncontested evidence of the applicant's previous counsel and contemporaneous signed meeting records showing the applicant was properly and repeatedly advised of the charges and the element that the goods were dangerous drugs; the applicant's later inconsistent allegations of believing the goods were dog food and of police coercion were not credible, amounted to fabrication, were raised belatedly, and therefore did not justify permitting withdrawal of the guilty plea.
Source excerpt
Explore more
