21 Nov 2019
香港特別行政區 對 馬誠謙（前稱馬仲晴)
- Citation
- [2019] HKCA 1314
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC166/2018
申請人未能證明陪審團裁決存在足以令上訴法院干預的不一致性；原審法官就證人證供及陪審團引導所稱之錯誤或不足並不重大；就量刑，以涉案最重一項4,200克為基準並採21年作基準適當，合併總刑期24年並非明顯過重，因此拒絕准予就定罪及判刑之逾期上訴。
Hong Kong Case Law
Inconsistent jury verdicts
14 Jul 2000
HKSAR v. HO KIN SANG
- Citation
- HKSAR v. HO KIN SANG
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC449/1999
The Court refused the certificate because it was satisfied it had power under the relevant statutory provisions to substitute the conviction and that it did not need to speculate about the jury's findings; the inconsistency lay in count 2 and substitution of unlawful wounding for wounding with intent corrected the error, so no point of great and general importance arose to warrant certification.
25 Sept 1998
HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI PIU AND OTHERS
- Citation
- HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI PIU AND OTHERS
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC453/1997
The Court held that the jury's acquittal on the trespass-with-arms count (count 1) and guilty verdict on the alternative possession count (count 2) were inconsistent such that no reasonable properly directed jury could have reached both verdicts; accordingly the conviction on count 2 (possession under s13 Cap.238) was quashed. The conviction for aggravated burglary (count 3) was upheld because the evidence against all appellants was sufficient and any trial irregularity did not produce a miscarriage of justice such that the proviso to s83 Cap.221 would apply.
26 Mar 1996
R. v. LAU MIU WAN
- Citation
- R. v. LAU MIU WAN
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC662/1995
The conviction was unsafe because the jury's inconsistent treatment of co-accused combined with a trial judge's erroneous direction on the treatment of mixed statements (failing to allow the jury fairly to evaluate exculpatory material alongside admissions, as required by Sharp) undermined the safety of the conviction; appeal allowed, conviction quashed.
16 Mar 1973
CHONG PING-CHEUNG v. THE QUEEN
- Citation
- CHONG PING-CHEUNG v. THE QUEEN
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC871/1972
Appeal dismissed because the appellant failed to show the jury's verdicts were so inherently unreasonable or contradictory that no reasonable jury could have reached them; the trial judge's directions on statutory presumptions and caution over co-accused evidence were adequate, and leave to appeal out of time against sentence was properly refused.
20 Mar 1971
SO PING-KUEN v. THE QUEEN
- Citation
- SO PING-KUEN v. THE QUEEN
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC574/1970
The appeal was dismissed because the jury could reasonably have accepted the appellant's cautioned statement admitting stabbing and rejected the deceased's dying declaration about the fatal blow; given expert evidence that death was due to a blunt instrument or a fall, the jury could logically acquit of murder (no proof appellant caused the lethal blow) yet convict of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm; inclusion of a lesser alternative count was permissible though Crown counsel should have explained its purpose to the jury, and the verdict was not disturbed as it was reasonab…