HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1978

CHOW HON-MING 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
4990-EN-1978-08-08

CHOW HON-MING v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000507/1978

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 
  
 1978 No. 507
 (Criminal)

 

BETWEEN  
 CHOW HON-MINGAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

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

Coram: Huggins and Pickering, JJ.A., and Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment: 8th August 1978.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

Huggins, J.A.:

1. The Appellant appeals against a sentence of five years' imprisonment for robbery. He was an air-conditioning mechanic earning a good salary. He was sent on duty to a flat to overhaul an air-conditioner and he returned on a subsequent day and then attacked the owner's wife, a woman who was pregnant, as she was leaving the flat. It is not entirely clear exactly what he did: he appears to have covered her mouth with his hand and at some stage was holding her neck: he threatened her with a knife and then forced her into the flat and stole property inside. Obviously people like the Appellant, who have lawful access to premises, must be deterred from committing robberies of this kind. It is, however, in favour of the Appellant that he did surrender himself, possibly as the result of the persuasion of his wife, who clearly has a good influence upon him. This is his first offence and he has pleaded Guilty. Despite the seriousness of the offence we think that the sentence is too high. He had a clear record and we are disposed to allow the appeal and to substitute a sentence of three and a half years' imprisonment. We order accordingly.

  

8th August 1978.

 

Representation: