Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Police caution

Legal area

Court

3 May 2018

香港特別行政區訴吳潤康

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 920
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA524/2017

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge properly found the defendant's statements voluntary in light of the prior caution and proximity of events, reasonably inferred that discarded clothing indicated concealment only as a permissible inference but did not base conviction solely on it, and correctly concluded the complainant's identification was reliable given good lighting, close proximity, multiple observation opportunities and a fair identification parade; therefore the evidence proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
12 Jul 2016

香港特別行政區訴江金生及另一人

Citation

香港特別行政區訴江金生及另一人
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA260/2016

The court held the identification evidence was reliable due to close, unimpeded observation over several minutes and consistent descriptions by independent officers, and the delayed caution did not render the second appellant's prior answers inadmissible because there was no reasonable suspicion at the time of preliminary questioning and no evidence of coercion; therefore the convictions were supported by the evidence.
17 Jan 2013

HKSAR v. CHAN YUK LING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN YUK LING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC102/2012

The conviction was quashed because the trial judge failed to address a central issue undermining the prosecution case — namely the reliability of an alleged oral admission made before arrest that was not put to the applicant in recorded interviews, was first recorded after the interviews in a notebook produced only at trial, and where there was unexplained delay in cautioning; these defects rendered the conviction unsafe.
6 Sept 2006

HKSAR v. JARHIA KULDEEP SINGH

Citation

HKSAR v. JARHIA KULDEEP SINGH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC96/2006

The judge erred by treating the appellant's silence as an 'unlikely reaction' and thereby impermissibly using silence against him; accordingly the trafficking conviction was quashed and substituted with a conviction for possession, and a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre report was ordered before sentencing pursuant to section 54A Cap.134.
14 Dec 2000

HKSAR v. CHAN WING KIT

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN WING KIT
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA951/2000

Given the undisputed evidence that the officer failed to caution before pressing the appellant while he was scared and embarrassed and the magistrate did not adequately assess whether that failure affected voluntariness, there was a real doubt as to the voluntariness of the admissions. The convictions were therefore unsafe and the appeal must be allowed.
29 Jul 1997

THE HKSAR v. YAU KONG SHING

Citation

THE HKSAR v. YAU KONG SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC276/1996

In the circumstances of an immediate, unhesitating identification of the seized substance made at the time of confrontation, the jury could properly infer the defendant's knowledge of the nature of the substance and of his possession of it; the absence of a formal caution did not cause real prejudice in the trial; ownership/hearsay and chain of custody objections did not render the verdict unsafe, and the application to appeal was dismissed.
2 Apr 1996

R. v. WONG YIK CHUN

Citation

R. v. WONG YIK CHUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC687/1995

The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the statement was voluntary and admissible, and absent error in law or fact the Court will not interfere with the trial judge's factual findings; accordingly the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and the conviction affirmed.
21 Jun 1982

LAM SHEK YIU v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LAM SHEK YIU v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC496/1982

The phrase "by way of trade or business" encompasses an employee receiving bets on behalf of an employer; the magistrate properly admitted the cautioned statements as voluntary and the exclusion of uncautioned immediate statements did not taint the later cautioned statements; evidence supported conviction for engaging in bookmaking and the appellate court substituted a conviction under section 7(1)(a).