Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Totality in sentencing

Legal area

Court

21 Mar 2023

HKSAR v. TURBAT UNDRAKHBAYAR AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCA 448
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC113/2022

Leave to appeal refused: A2's conviction was upheld because the contemporaneous evidence (presence with the furtive group for an extended period and holding a scarf used to conceal the theft) was, despite some discrepancies in police accounts, of such strength that a reasonable tribunal could convict; A1's sentence was appropriate given multiple serious aggravating factors and extensive relevant prior convictions.
29 Sept 2017

HKSAR v. MOON, AHMED @ MONSUR AHMED

Citation

HKSAR v. MOON, AHMED @ MONSUR AHMED
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA428/2017

The Court found no basis to disturb the magistrate's credibility findings that the appellant knowingly possessed counterfeit goods for sale and was employed in the enterprise; statutory and common law defences were unavailable on the evidence; the magistrate acted within law in activating the suspended sentence in full; the convictions and the aggregate sentence (24 months and 2 weeks) were not plainly wrong or manifestly excessive, therefore appeals against conviction and sentence were dismissed.
30 Mar 2017

HKSAR v. CHEUNG MAN CHOI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG MAN CHOI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC43/2016

The recusal application is dismissed because the impugned comments were made in the context of an earlier appeal on the basis of agreed facts and did not represent vituperative or personal views that would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias; therefore the judge may participate in hearing the applicant's leave to appeal and any subsequent resentencing.
29 Nov 2012

HKSAR v. HUI PO KEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. HUI PO KEUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC240/2011

The Court held that the conviction appeal was without merit (any omission as to credibility direction was corrected and did not cause miscarriage); judicial interventions did not render the trial unfair; sentencing differentiation between mastermind and integral participant was justified but one count (count 4) carried excessive term and the total sentence for the 1st applicant was reduced to reflect totality — 2nd applicant's total sentence of 8 years 3 months upheld, 1st applicant's total reduced from 7 years 3 months to 6 years.
16 Nov 2012

HKSAR v. HSU MING MEI

Citation

HKSAR v. HSU MING MEI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC91/2011

The Court held that pre‑charge customised statements were admissible as contextual evidence; although the trial judge failed to give a credibility limb of the good‑character direction this was a material irregularity, but applying the proviso to section 83(1) CPO the convictions were nevertheless safe because the judge’s findings rejecting the applicant’s exculpatory accounts were supported by overwhelming and compelling evidence; the sentence of 42 months was appropriate and the appeal against sentence was refused.
10 Mar 2011

HKSAR v. ONG SIU SIN, KEVIN

Citation

HKSAR v. ONG SIU SIN, KEVIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA733/2009

The magistrate's factual findings that the complainants were credible and that the appellant acknowledged debts by promises and delivery of cheques supported the conclusion that legally enforceable liabilities existed; the magistrate applied the correct criminal standard of proof, properly admitted and evaluated documentary evidence and rightly amended charges under s27 without causing injustice; delay in producing the statement of findings, while regrettable, did not prejudice the appellant sufficiently to warrant quashing convictions or a permanent stay, therefore convictions and sentences…
17 Sept 1996

R. v. LEUNG PAK LUN

Citation

R. v. LEUNG PAK LUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC66/1996

The court held that the convictions on counts 1 and 2 were supported by the evidence and should be upheld, but the conviction on count 3 was unsafe because the trial judge wrongly directed himself in a way that importuned a burden on the defence to show sole possession by another; accordingly conviction on count 3 was quashed and sentences on the remaining convictions were varied to three years' imprisonment each to reflect totality.
14 May 1993

R. v. WONG KWAI-FUN

Citation

R. v. WONG KWAI-FUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC390/1991

The Court held that (1) a conviction under s.90(1) for assisting offenders does not preclude a separate conviction under s.89 for aiding and abetting the substantive offence because s.89 liability does not mean the aider is treated as the perpetrator for s.90(1) purposes; (2) the attempt to pervert the course of justice could properly be joined to the counselling/procuring counts because the counts shared a common factual origin and the evidence was relevant; (3) the trial judge's directions, including accomplice warnings and limitations on use of the letters, were adequate and a Broadhurst d…
5 Aug 1986

THE QUEEN v. CHUNG CHU CHOI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHUNG CHU CHOI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC85/1986

The Court found the trial judge properly assessed credibility and that the evidence of the accomplice and PW3 was substantially corroborated by surrounding events and PW2; accordingly leave to appeal against conviction was refused. However, the Court held the overall five-year sentence was excessive and reduced the sentence to an aggregate four years by reducing the first count from three years to two years to be served consecutively with two years on the second count.
29 Jan 1985

THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG LONG CHUNG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG LONG CHUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC221/1984

The Court refused leave to appeal, holding that the trial judge's imposition of an overall effective sentence of 7 years was not manifestly excessive given the persistent, deliberate falsification of accounts over a year to conceal breaches of the Deposit-taking Companies Ordinance and the substantial losses to depositors; the judge intended that sentence as reflecting the appropriate totality.