20 Nov 2018
Leave to appeal was refused because the central issue of identification was properly resolved beyond reasonable doubt on the evidence, the alleged nondisclosure was speculative and not material to that issue, allegations of bias were unsubstantiated, and credibility/weight assessments are for the trial courts and not a basis for appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
6 Jun 2018
The appellate court upheld the convictions because the trial judge, who had the advantage of observing the undercover witness, conducted a careful, separate assessment of each count, properly applied Turnbull identification guidance, and reasonably accepted the witness as honest and reliable despite identified errors; the third appellant's appeal against refusal of costs was dismissed because late disclosure and provenance/authenticity concerns of D8 and resulting case-management prejudice rendered the judge's exercise of discretion reasonable and not subject to interference.
2 Apr 2014
The trial judge reasonably accepted the undercover officer's credible and consistent testimony, found the appellant's account inconsistent and implausible, did not reverse the burden of proof, and the delay in arrest and absence of the two restaurant patrons did not sufficiently undermine the prosecution case; therefore the convictions were safe and the appeal is dismissed.
27 Feb 2008
Although the unauthorised provision of the transcript to the accomplice was inappropriate, on the facts the irregularity did not render the conviction unsafe given the witness's voluntary admission of having seen the transcript, the continued existence of disparities, the jury having been warned and defence counsel's tactical choices; likewise the undercover officer's overheard conversation was admissible because the officer did not interrogate or prompt and the applicant's responsive remark amounted to an admission (exception to hearsay).
6 Nov 2006
The court held the sentencing judge did not err: the operation was larger, more public, more organised and more persistent than in Lai Pui Sang so higher starting points were justified; Lai Pui Sang is persuasive guidance not a rigid tariff; accordingly the sentences imposed were not excessive or wrong in principle and the applications for leave to appeal were dismissed.
12 Oct 2005
The trial magistrate's credibility findings in favour of the prosecution were accepted; the undercover sale evidence and the link between the stockroom and appellant established the elements of each offence beyond reasonable doubt, so the Court of First Instance dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions.
12 Oct 1999
The learned Magistrate erred by refusing to apply or give himself a Turnbull direction and failed to address the specific dangers of identification evidence by an undercover police officer; that failure rendered the conviction unsafe and necessitated quashing the conviction and setting aside the sentence.
2 Jul 1998
The trial judge permissibly drew an irresistible inference from the facts that the representations were false and that both defendants knew they were false and acted dishonestly; the evidence (undercover operation, demonstration, and conduct) left no sensible alternative interpretation and the appeal is dismissed.
11 Jun 1996
The court held that the chain of custody was established by identification of the sealed tamper‑proof envelope and the Government Chemist certificate, the magistrate properly evaluated credibility and evidence, and therefore the conviction was safe and the appeal must be dismissed.
7 Mar 1996
Leave to appeal dismissed: the three year sentence was within established appellate guidelines and not manifestly excessive; the conviction was sustainable on uncontradicted prosecution evidence and no valid grounds of appeal were shown.