HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1968

CHAN WO 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
6243-EN-1968-11-25

CHAN WO v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000645/1968

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 645 OF 1968

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

BETWEEN
CHAN WOAppellant

AND

THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Huggins J.

Date of Judgment: 25 November 1968

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Huggins J: The appellant appeals against the sentence of 9 months' imprisonment imposed for an offence of simple larceny. He was caught red-handed stealing from a store. The property stolen was valued at about $10.00. On the face of it that is a severe sentence but the appellant has an appalling record: he has twice been convicted on indictment of offences of robbery and received sentences in the first case of 8 years' and for the second offence of 6 years' imprisonment. He has 11 other convictions, involving offences under the Larceny Ordinance and drugs offences. He was first convicted in 1947 and has spent the majority of the period between then and now in prison. In my view this sentence was not unreasonable and the appeal is dismissed.

 

25th November, 1968.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Mr. Sharatte for the Respondent