Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Prevalence as sentencing factor

Legal area

Court

22 Dec 2005

HKSAR v. ABAYOMI BAMIDELE FAYOMI

Citation

HKSAR v. ABAYOMI BAMIDELE FAYOMI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC197/2005

The Court held that, on the agreed facts and sentencing precedents, a starting point of 3 years reduced by 3 months for the applicant's clear record and agreement to the evidence was not manifestly excessive; the judge's offhand remark about prevalence was unwise absent statistics but did not vitiate the sentence, and therefore the application to appeal/leave was dismissed.
12 Jun 2003

HKSAR v. TANG KWOK WING AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG KWOK WING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC253/2001

Enhancement under section 27(11) could not be sustained because the sentencing judge relied on prevalence statistics that were not shown to reflect the position at the time of sentence; the prosecution had sought enhancement only on prevalence and the baseline sentence already incorporated deterrence, therefore the Court reduced sentences (D1 to five years overall; other Applicants to four years each).
4 Mar 2003

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI KING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI KING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC361/2002

The court held enhancement under s.27(11) was improperly applied: conspiracy to defraud (a Schedule 2 offence) cannot be treated as 'organised crime' under the first limb and the prosecution statistics did not demonstrate prevalence at the time of sentencing to justify enhancement under the second limb; consequently sentences in both cases were reduced and reallocated to achieve a just overall sentence (applicant granted extension of time and appeals allowed to the extent indicated).

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. ABAYOMI BAMIDELE FAYOMI

HKSAR v. TANG KWOK WING AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI KING