18 Aug 1994
YAU CHI KEUNG v. R.
- Citation
- YAU CHI KEUNG v. R.
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC316/1993
Because the statutory scheme enacted in June 1992 created a distinction between an intent offence (s76(1)) and simple possession (s76(2)) and the facts did not establish the intent required for s76(1), Article 12(1) entitled the applicant to the benefit of the lighter penalty; accordingly the four year sentence on the possession count was set aside and substituted with a two and a half year concurrent sentence.