HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1978

CHIM SHUN-YIM 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
3100-EN-1978-07-06

CHIM SHUN-YIM v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000326/1978

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL1978 No. 326
 (Criminal)

BETWEEN:  
 CHIM Shun-yimAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

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

Date of Judgment: 6th July, 1978.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant was found guilty of being in possession of dangerous drugs for the purposes of trafficking and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. The amount of drugs involved was 40.2 grammes of heroin and they were concealed in a Remy-Martin brandy carton which the appellant was seen to be taking into his house.

2. The appellant, who is aged 41, has a clear record and is married with children. Originally, the appellant appealed against his conviction but this was abandoned before us.

3. Counsel for the appellant urged that five years' imprisonment for this offence was out of line with the sentences usually passed for such offences. He produced before the court a most useful chart which he obtained from the Legal Department which showed the sentences that have been passed for similar crimes by this court.

4. We do think that five years' imprisonment for this offence is higher than the usual tariff and for that reason and taking into consideration the appellant's clear record, we think that justice would best be served if the application is allowed and the sentence reduced to one of three and a half years' imprisonment.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 President.

 

Representation:

Cheng Huan (D.L.A.) for appellant

Duffy for crown