HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1971

YIU TAK CHUEN 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
3198-EN-1971-07-14

YIU TAK CHUEN v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000335/1971

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 335 OF 1971

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

 

BETWEEN
YIU TAK CHUENAppellant
and
THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Huggins, J.

Date of Judgment: 14th July, 1971.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The Appellant appeals against sentences of eighteen months' imprisonment concurrent on two charges of robbery. He was arrested by the police on suspicion of his involvement in a robbery with which he has never been charged. He was taken to the Police Station and there a watch was found upon him. The police told him that they suspected that he had obtained that watch by unlawful means and under caution the Defendant admitted that it was obtained in the course of a robbery. This robbery had never been reported to the police, but it now appears that he and another man robbed a man when he was returning home at night; that one man had seized him round the neck from behind and another had taken away a watch and $40 in cash. The watch found on the Appellant was identified as the one taken in that robbery. The Appellant went on to admit implication in another robbery, which had been reported to the police. The robbery followed exactly the same course as the one to which the first charged related except that the victim was also punched in the face and that the sum of cash taken was $140.

2. The Appellant has been before the courts on seven previous occasions, on three of them in respect of a multiplicity of offences. His convictions involved larceny, house-breaking, assault with intent to rob and impersonating a police officer. He has twice been put on probation and has received treatment in the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre, this last being upon the only conviction he has had for an offence under the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.

3. The learned Magistrate expressly made allowance for the fact that the offences could not have been proved but for the Appellant's own confessions and, having regard to the violence that was used in respect of both offences, I am satisfied that the sentences were entirely proper.

 

14th July, 1971.

 

Representation: