30 Dec 2016
香港特別行政區 訴 熊煒彬
- Citation
- 香港特別行政區 訴 熊煒彬
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA481/2016
The appellate court held that the magistrate's misdescription of dates did not render the sentencing exercise unlawful or the starting point manifestly wrong; given the facts (minor thefts for personal use due to hardship, absence of planning, and magistrate's acceptance of mitigation) the 6‑week starting point and concurrent execution were within lawful discretion. Under s109C(1) the suspended sentence may be activated but a court may substitute a shorter term where full execution would be disproportionate; therefore the suspended 8‑month term was ordered to be executed but replaced by a sho…