HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1968

LEUNG TAK 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
6501-EN-1968-12-04

LEUNG TAK v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000685/1968

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 685 OF 1968

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

BETWEEN
LEUNG TAK

Appellant

AND
THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Huggins,J.

Date of Judgment: 4 December 1968

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Huggins,J:

1. The appellant was convicted of unlawful possession of dangerous drugs. He appeals on the ground that there was no evidence or no sufficient evidence on which to found the conviction.

2. A police officer saw him coming out of a lane. On seeing the constable (who was, it is true, in plain clothes) the appellant turned round. He was stopped and searched. In his pocket were found a packet and a paper taper. The constable said he suspected there was white powder in the packet and the defendant said "don't know". In fact the packet contained traces of diacetylmorphine hydrochloride and O.53 gramme of barbitone.

3. The appellant's defence was that the articles were not found on him, that he was arrested and that after his arrest the packet was found under a plank in the lane. The learned magistrate believed the evidence of the constable and that was ample evidence upon which to found a conviction.

4. The appeal is dismissed.

 

4th December 1968.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Mr. Evans for the Respondent