HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1991

THE QUEEN v. WONG SUM CHUEN

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
3216-EN-1991-11-21

THE QUEEN v. WONG SUM CHUEN

HTML content

CACC000336/1991

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. CA 336 OF 1991

____________

BETWEEN

THE QUEENRespondent
AND
WONG SUM CHUENAppellant

_____________

Coram: Hon. Silke, V-P, Power, J.A. & Sears, J.

Date of Hearing: 21 November 1991

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 21 November 1991

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

 

Sears J. (giving the Judgment in the Court)

1. On 14th June 1991 the applicant appeared before Judge Cameron in the District Court, charged with possession of a dangerous drug for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

2. The brief facts were that on January in 1991, Police Officers patrolling in Kowloon City saw a Chinese male acting suspiciously.  They approached and intercepted him and, on conducting a body search, found two red paper packets containing dangerous drugs. The total weight of the mixture was 6.55 grammes and the total weight of salts of esters of morphine was 4.30 grammes.

3. The Trial Judge after listening to the evidence was of the view that it would not support the charge of unlawful trafficking, but the applicant was convicted of simple possession. The Judge called for reports; it was clear that he was a drug addict who had difficulties in overcoming his drug addiction, a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment was imposed.

4. Against that sentence, he now seeks leave to appeal. We are of the view that 18 months was too high. Cases of simple possession of this amount generally attract a sentence in the order of 9 months' to 12 months' imprisonment. We are of the view that the appropriate sentence here should be one of 9 months' imprisonment.

5. The application for leave to appeal, therefore, is granted. The appeal against sentence is allowed, and the sentence is reduced to one of 9 months' imprisonment.

(William Silke)
Vice President
(N.P. Power)
Justice of Appeal
(R.A.W. Sears)
Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr. Michael N. Holmes for the Crown

Appellant: Wong Sum-chuen (in person)