HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1971

WONG KEUNG 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
3096-EN-1971-06-30

WONG KEUNG v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000326/1971

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 326 OF 1971

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

 

BETWEEN
WONG KEUNGAppellant
and
THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Huggins, J.

Date of Judgment: 30th June, 1971.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. This is an appeal against a sentence of 9 months' imprisonment for going equipped for stealing. The Appellant was seen in circumstances which led some detectives to think that he was about to pick pockets. He was stopped and searched and a piece of razor blade was found in his right hand. He admitted that he was intending to use it for stealing from pockets.

2. This is by no means the first occasion on which the Appellant has been convicted of similar offences. Nevertheless the Chief Justice has pointed out that this type of offence was previously dealt with under sections for which the maximum penalty was 3 months' imprisonment. It is desirable that defendants should be treated in a similar way for similar offences and I think that I ought in this case to follow the course which he had adopted and to allow the appeal to the extent of reducing the sentences to 6 months' imprisonment concurrent on each count. In so doing I record the argument of counsel for the Crown, which of course is a valid one, that under this section every case must be dealt with on its merits. An accused person found in possession of equipment suitable for stealing from a bank cannot expect to be treated in the same way as a person going equipped for picking pockets.

 

30th June, 1971.

 

Representation: