HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1975

CHIU SHING 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
6975-EN-1976-02-14

CHIU SHING v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000766/1975

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 766 OF 1975

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

  

BETWEEN:  
 CHIU ShingAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 14th February, 1976.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant appeals against a sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment passed upon him for robbery on the 16th August, 1975.

2. The appellant first came before me on the 27th September, 1975 when I allowed the appeal to the extent of suspending the sentence for eighteen months. This order was a nullity because there is no power for a court to suspend a sentence for the offence of robbery. Be that as it may, the appellant pleaded guilty to the offence of possession of a dangerous drug and was sentenced to six months' imprisonment on the 9th February, 1976. At that time, the magistrate who dealt with that case committed the appellant to the Supreme Court under section 109(d)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.

3. The appellant came before me in court to-day and treating the order which was made on the 27th September, 1975 as a nullity I ordered that his sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment for the robbery which was passed on him on the 16th August, 1975 be served as from that date and concurrent with the sentence passed on him on February 9th, 1976.

  

  

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 Chief Justice.

  

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Whetter for crown.