HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1968

CHAU MING v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
6236-EN-1968-12-05

CHAU MING v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000644/1968

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 644 OF 1968

-----------------

BETWEEN
CHAU MINGAppellant
AND
THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Huggins J.

Date of Judgment: 5 December 1968

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

Huggins J: The appellant appeals against a sentence of 6 months' imprisonment imposed by the learned magistrate for an offence of larceny from a person. He was seen acting suspiciously in the street and at a bus-stop he was seen to take something from the pocket of a person about to board a tram. He pleaded guilty to the offence. The appellant has a very long record of previous convictions, he having been before the court previously on no less than 38 different occasions since 1956. Some of the previous offences related to dangerous drugs but there were many of dishonesty. The appellant had been out of prison for only a very few days when he committed this further offence: he had been convicted on the 9th of April for a similar offence and sentenced to 9 months' imprisonment. In my view 6 months' imprisonment was if anything a light sentence for picking pockets in the light of the appellant's record. He has been in and out of prison with monotonous regularity and I felt it was desirable to know something more about his past.

2. I have had a valuable report from the probation officer. This shows that the appellant has really made no attempt to rid himself of his obvious addiction to drugs which is very likely at the root of his trouble. He has no fixed place of abode and has had no regular employment for the past 10 years. I see no reason to interfere with the sentence that was imposed by the learned magistrate.

3. The appeal is dismissed.

 

5th December, 1968.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Mr. Sharatte for the Respondent