HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1977

CHAU SIU HUNG 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
870-EN-1977-12-08

CHAU SIU HUNG v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC001254/1977

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT 
  
 Criminal Appeal
 1977 No. 1254

 

BETWEEN  
 ----------------- 
 CHAU SIU HUNGAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Morley-John, J.

Date of Judgment: 8th December, 1977.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant was found guilty of escaping from lawful custody and sentenced to a term of two years' imprisonment. He appealed against conviction but not against sentence. There was no merit whatsoever in his appeal against conviction, but considering the facts of the case it did appear to me that the sentence of two years' imprisonment for escaping from lawful custody in the circumstances of this case was manifestly excessive. I have therefore dismissed the appellant's appeal against conviction but have allowed him to appeal out of time against his sentence of two years' imprisonment.

2. The appellant and another person were arrested by the police in connection with a suspected dangerous drug offence. The appellant was in fact charged with the offence of simple possession before the learned magistrate who found the appellant not guilty of the offence. However he did quite properly find the appellant guilty of escaping from lawful custody. After the arrest the appellant and this other person were hand-cuffed together, and when the police were off guard they both made a bolt for it. The appellant was later apprehended. As well as being charged with escaping from lawful custody the appellant was also charged and found guilty of theft of the handcuffs for which offence the learned magistrate sentenced the appellant to six months' imprisonment to be served concurrently with the sentence of two years' imprisonment for escaping from lawful custody. The appellant does not appeal in respect of the theft charge.

3. As I have said I consider that the sentence of two years' imprisonment for escaping from lawful custody as the appellant did is grossly excessive and the appeal against this sentence is allowed to the extent that the sentence of two years' imprisonment is reduced to one of three months.

 

 

 sd. (M. Morley-John, J.)

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Mr. Maxwell, crown counsel, for crown/respondent.