THE QUEEN v. SIU YEUNG-LUNG

CACC000444/1983

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG	1983 No.444
HIGH COURT	(Criminal)

BETWEEN:

	THE QUEEN	Respondent
	and
	SIU Yeung-lung	Appellant

Coram: Roberts, C.J.

Date: 5th May, 1983.

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

[Unrepresented defendant should be told that he has right to make speeches at and of his case and in mitigation]

1. Mr. Siu appealed against his conviction for careless driving. In support of his appeal he submitted written grounds.

2. Some of these dealt with the facts of the case, putting forward a different interpretation of the evidence from that adopted by the magistrate. I have not found it necessary to reach any conclusion on these submissions.

3. However, the appellant argued that he had not been given a proper opportunity of defending himself because the magistrate had failed to permit him -

	(a)	to re-examine himself after he had been cross-examined;
	(b)	to make a final speech on his own behalf before conviction; and
	(c)	to address the magistrate in mitigation after conviction and before sentence.

4. The record of the proceedings does not show that the appellant was afforded any of these three opportunities.

5. I do not consider that the first omission is so grave as to undermine the validity of the proceedings.

6. However, a failure to inform an unrepresented defendant that he has the right to make a final speech before conviction, or a speech in mitigation after conviction and before sentence, is a serious omission.

7. I appreciate that it is difficult for a busy magistrate to record everything which occurs during a trial, but I think it is important that he should record that an accused person has been given the opportunity to address the court before conviction and in mitigation after conviction.

8. I accepted the appellant's submission that he had not been afforded these chances, a claim which was supported by the absence of any reference to them in the record.

9. Without reaching any conclusion as to the other merits of the appeal, I shall therefore quash the conviction and order a retrial before another magistrate.

Representation:

D.J. Little, D.P.C.C. for Respondent.

Appellant in person.