HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1968

TSE SIU NANG 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
6417-EN-1968-12-04

TSE SIU NANG v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000670/1968

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.670 OF 1968

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

BETWEEN
TSE SIU NANGAppellant
AND
THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Huggins, J.

Date of Judgment: 4 December 1968

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Huggins, J.

1. The appellant appeals against his conviction on a charge of unlawful possession of dangerous drugs. A police officer was on plain clothes patrol in Tung Tau Resettlement Estate when he saw the appellant walking along in a furtive manner. He appeared to have something clenched in his left hand. The constable says that he went up to the appellant, searched him and found in his left hand an orange-coloured packet. This packet he subsequently handed to another constable whom he saw to write particulars on an envelope, in which the packet was placed. This other constable gave evidence that there was handed to him a yellow packet of suspected dangerous drugs. When the drugs were opened in the court the contents turned out to be in an orange-coloured packet. The second constable then said that he had made a mistake and that the packet handed to him had been an orange packet and he confirmed that fact by saying that the particulars written on the envelope had indicated that it was an orange packet. This was corroborated by an examination of the envelope itself.

2. The appellant gave evidence and his story was that he was merely walking to work and, in effect, that a packet of dangerous drugs was planted on him. He went on to say that he did not see the packet at all until it was produced in court, although he admitted signing the envelope at the police station. The learned magistrate in a careful judgment set out all this evidence and come to the conclusion that the police officers were telling the truth. I see no reason to disagree with the conclusion which he reached.

3. The appeal is dismissed.

 

4th December 1968.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Mr. Evans for the Respondent