HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1977

CHEUNG WAI-TING 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
7212-EN-1977-03-28

CHEUNG WAI-TING v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000083/1977

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 
  
 1977 No. 83
 (Criminal)

BETWEEN  
 CHEUNG WAI-TINGAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins and Pickering, JJ.A.

Date of Judgment: 28th March, 1977.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Pickering, J.A.:

1. In the early hours of the morning in Morse Park an attempt was made by two police officers to arrest the Appellant and another man whereupon both resisted arrest and, whilst the other man escaped, the Appellant was successfully arrested.

2. He originally faced four charges, the first two of which related to the initial cause of his arrest. For reasons which need not concern us the Crown did not proceed with those first two charges so that the Appellant faced simply two charges of assault with intent to resist arrest to which charges he pleaded guilty. The evidence was that in the assault upon the police officers no weapons were used and the injuries sustained were slight consisting of abrasions and the swelling of one finger. In those circumstances we consider that the sentences of 1½ years' imprisonment upon each charge, those sentences to run concurrently, were unduly high. There can be little doubt that had the Crown been in a position to continue upon the original two charges and obtained convictions thereon, the charges of assault with intent to resist arrest would have deserved and attracted only very light sentences - not merely on the ground that the totality of the sentences would otherwise have been excessive. In the circumstances the application for leave to appeal is allowed and the sentences of 1½ years' imprisonment upon each charge to run concurrently, are set aside and substituted by concurrent terms of six months' imprisonment.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Adams for Crown/respondent.