HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1972

TANG CHAI 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
4062-EN-1972-06-16

TANG CHAI v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000414/1972

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 414 OF 1972

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

 

BETWEEN  
 TANG ChaiAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Briggs, J. in Court

Date of Judgment: 16 June 1972

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. In this case the accused, Tang Chai pleaded guilty to one offence of theft and was sentenced to 30 months imprisonment. He appeals against that sentence on account of its severity. At the time of his trial he asked that three other thefts of a similar nature be taken into consideration.

2. In each case including that to which he pleaded guilty the appellant had stolen something from a parked vehicle. In this particular case it was a transistor radio worth $100. The appellant admitted his offence and the radio has been recovered.

3. The appellant has a long criminal record dating back to 1954. It includes many convictions in connexion with dangerous drugs and there are at least 8 convictions for offences similar to the present.

4. The Magistrate would appear to have exceeded the jurisdiction conferred upon him under Section 92 of the Magistrates Ordinance in imposing a sentence of 30 months for one act of theft. In any event it is my view that notwithstanding the record of the appellant 30 months is a manifestly excessive sentence. I therefore reduced the sentence to one of 18 months imprisonment which I ordered to be served as from the date of the conviction.

 

 

 (G.G. Briggs)
 Puisne Judge

 

Representation: