HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1970

WONG MUK 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
3468-EN-1970-03-18

WONG MUK v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000036/1970

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 36 OF 1970

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

BETWEEN
WONG MUKAppellant

AND

THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Full Court (Briggs J. Mills-Owens J. Huggins J.)

Date of Judgment: 18 March 1970

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of assault with intent to rob and was sentenced to imprisonment for four years. The Court also ordered that he be subject to Police supervision for a period of two years after he comes out of prison. He appealed against that sentence.

2. The appellant threatened a girl in a lift with a knife. A struggle ensued and her right hand was slightly cut by the knife. The appellant was caught almost at once.

3. The appellant has five previous convictions including convictions for robbery and assault. At the hearing of the appeal he informed the Court that he had been detained in a mental hospital for a period of 8 years. The Court ordered that a report as to his mental health should be made. This shows that the appellant has twice been treated at Castle Peak Hospital for Schizo-phrenic illness.

4. The appellant chiefly complained that the order for police supervision would prevent him from getting and maintaining employment and would cause him undue anxiety. The report shows that such an order is very unlikely to have an adverse effect on his mental state so as to cause or encourage a relapse into his previous condition, but that it is possible that an order of Police supervision might cause him undue anxiety. In these circumstances the Court varied the sentence by quashing the order for Police supervision. The Court ordered that the time spent in prison pending the hearing of the appeal should count towards the sentence.

 

 

(R. H. Mills-Owens)(Alan Huggins)(G.G. Briggs)
Appeal JudgeAppeal JudgePresident

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

M. Wong, S.C.C. for Respondent

Oral judgment reduced into writing.