HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1974

NG KWOK-PUN 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
7084-EN-1974-10-30

NG KWOK-PUN v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000792/1974

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 792 OF 1974

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

 

BETWEEN:  
 NG Kwok-punAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J., McMullin & Pickering, JJ.

Date of Judgment: 30th October, 1974.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to two offences, one, to the theft of seven wooden cases of cutlery; and two, robbery of an unknown person of a wristwatch and $1,000. He was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment on the first charge and to three years and nine months on the second charge. He appeals against the sentence on the second charge only. The sentences were ordered to be served concurrently.

2. The victim in the robbery charge is an unknown Chinese man. He did not make any report of his being robbed to the police. The robbery was only disclosed after inquiries made by the police from the appellant, who volunteered the information that he had committed this offence. It appears that the appellant and another person ambushed and robbed the victim in a street, removed his wristwatch and stole $1,000 from him.

3. The appellant is a man of 25 years and has two previous convictions which are material, one is for robbery and one for wounding with intent.

4. We think that the sentence of three years and nine months for this offence is manifestly excessive and we think that justice would best be done if the appeal is allowed to the extent of substituting for that sentence a sentence of six months, such sentence to be served consecutively to the sentence of eighteen months on the first charge.

 

Representation: