HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1975

NG CHUN-KWAN 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
4285-EN-1975-06-11

NG CHUN-KWAN v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000437/1975

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 437 OF 1975

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

 

BETWEEN:  
 NG Chun-kwanAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 11th June, 1975.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to being a member of a triad society and was sentenced to be detained in a training centre. The court was told that the appellant joined the Fook Yee Hing Triad Society in July 1973. In March 1974, the appellant was sentenced to be detained in a training centre for the offence of robbery.

2. There is no evidence before the court that the appellant has taken part in any triad activity since he was convicted of robbery. The magistrate took a great deal of care over this case and asked for a probation officer's report. This was not favourable to the appellant. The magistrate stated in his statement of findings that he was reluctant to put the appellant in prison and so he ordered him to be detained in a training centre.

3. With the greatest respect, I do not think that this is a proper sentence to impose in a case of this nature. I therefore allowed the appeal against sentence, quashed the order for detention in a training centre and sentenced the appellant to a term of nine months' imprisonment, which is to be suspended for two years.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 Chief Justice.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Macdougall for crown.