HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1968

LAU PING TUEN 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
6447-EN-1968-12-04

LAU PING TUEN v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000675/1968

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.675 OF 1968

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

BETWEEN
LAU PING TUENAppellant
AND
THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Huggins, J.

Date of Judgment: 4 December 1968

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Huggins, J:

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to one charge of larceny in a dwelling and one of simple larceny. He was sentenced to 9 months' and 6 months' imprisonment respectively on those charges, the sentences to run consecutively.

2. The facts were that the appellant was found sleeping on a roof-top. He was using a parcel as a pillow and in that parcel was found a radiogram. The appellant subsequently admitted to the police that he had stolen the radiogram and he further admitted that a wrist watch which was found on him had been stolen. Neither of these thefts had been reported to the police and it was only as a result of the free confession of the appellant that any proceedings could be instituted against him - unless possibly for the offence of unlawful possession of suspected stolen goods, though whether a conviction would have resulted upon such a charge is perhaps questionable.

3. The appellant has a very long record but over half of it is taken up by convictions for unauthorized sale of theatre tickets. It has, since the trial of this case, been held by the Full Court in Chan Sik-wun v. Reg.(1) that considerable weight should be attached to the mitigating factor that an offence would not have come to light but for the confession of an accused person and, even taking into account the appellant's previous convictions for offences of dishonesty, I cannot think that sufficient weight was given to this factor in the present case. I think the proper course is for me to direct that the sentence shall run concurrently and not consecutively. The appeal is allowed to that extent.

 

4th December, 1968.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Mr. Evans for the Respondent

 

 

(1) Cr. App. No. 643 of 1968.