19 Apr 2006
Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge properly admitted the cautioned statements as voluntary and made credible findings supported by the evidence such that there were no arguable grounds to overturn the conviction, and the sentences were imposed in accordance with established guidelines and were not manifestly excessive; age did not afford mitigation for trafficking.
11 Dec 2002
The court dismissed leave to appeal against conviction because there was no reason to disturb the deputy judge's detailed credibility findings and assessment of identification evidence; on sentencing the court allowed the appeal in part by ordering the possession sentence to run concurrently with the trafficking sentences under the principle of totality, reducing the total custody from 4 years 9 months to 4 years 6 months.
23 May 2002
Given the small quantities involved (approximately 0.2g in each packet), the aggregate sentence of 18 months was excessive; the court substituted concurrent sentences of 12 months for each offence while reaffirming that possession of drugs in prison is a serious offence warranting deterrent sentencing and that offences committed in custody may properly be ordered to run consecutively.
2 Jun 2000
Convictions were upheld because the trial judge rejected the allegations of assault and planting and accepted the prosecution's inferences from the quantity and presence of packaging; however, the aggregate sentence had to be reduced because treating the combined narcotic weight as trafficking for both charges produced a sentence equivalent to trafficking in the combined amount, which was not justified given only part of the total was trafficking; therefore the sentence was reduced by six months by altering the concurrency of the sentences.
23 Feb 2000
The court held that the trial judge's overall sentencing exercise was lawful and appropriate: a three year starting point per offence (after plea reductions) was justifiable even though the judge omitted an initial step outlined in HKSAR v Wan Sheung sum because applying that step would have produced the same result; the sentences were properly ordered to run consecutively because the second offence was committed while on bail the following day; totality was considered and an aggregate term of four years was appropriate; therefore the application to vary to concurrent sentences was dismissed.
17 Nov 1999
The appeal is dismissed because the magistrate acted within sentencing discretion: starting point of 12 months reduced to nine months was justified and withholding the full one-third discount due to delay in plea was a proper exercise of discretion; there was no error of principle nor manifest excess to warrant interference.
12 Oct 1999
The magistrate's departure from the six to nine month guideline was unjustified because practical less restrictive alternatives existed; accordingly the appellate court substituted a custodial sentence of four months and directed social welfare follow-up.
31 Mar 1999
Given the appellant's extensive criminal record, previous unsuccessful DATC orders and an adverse DATC report, the magistrate correctly applied established sentencing starting points (12 months for small quantity heroin possession) and justifiably reduced to 8 months for the guilty plea; there was no error in law or principle and the appeal is dismissed.
26 Feb 1999
The magistrate correctly applied a 12-month tariff and properly reduced it by one-quarter for a late guilty plea; the nine-month sentence was appropriate and the appeal is dismissed.
26 Feb 1999
The appeal was dismissed because the Magistrate lawfully exercised sentencing discretion: the DATC report properly recommended against admission, the appellant's six prior convictions justified a harsher sentence than a co-defendant with a clear record, and no improper disparity or error in principle was shown to disturb the six month imprisonment sentence.