HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1992

THE QUEEN v. CHIU KWOK WING

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
71466-EN-1993-02-19

THE QUEEN v. CHIU KWOK WING

HTML content

1992, No. 1209
(Criminal)

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

HEADNOTE

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

DRUG DEPENDANT CONVICTED OF THEFT - SENTENCE MUST RELATE TO SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENCE.

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1209 OF 1992

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

BETWEEN

 

THE QUEEN

and

CHIU KWOK WING

Respondent

Appellant

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

Coram : Hon Bewley J. in Court

Date of hearing : 19th February 1993

Date of delivery of judgment : 19th February 1993

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

J U D G M E N T

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty in Eastern Magistrates Court to one charge of theft and was sentenced to nine months imprisonment. He was stopped in the street and was found to be carrying two plastic bags containing three jars of coffee and four bottles of shower cream (whatever that is), which he admitted stealing from a 7-Eleven store.    

2. The appellant is 33 years of age and a chronic drug dependant. He has undergone three periods of detention in the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre and, not surprisingly, is considered unsuitable for further treatment. He has one previous conviction for theft.

3. The magistrate's reasons for sentencing the appellant to nine months were:

“1. To take a course other than a custodial sentence would mean that the Defendant would immediately resume taking drugs.

2. An enforced period of abstinence for a meaningful length of time may, though the possibility is remote, encourage him to abstain from taking drugs.

3. Imprisonment for an intermediate length of time was the only practical sentence in the circumstances.”

4. I realise that the sentence was intended to be in the appellant’s best interests but it is too severe in relation to the offence.

5. The appeal is allowed and the sentence reduced to one of three months imprisonment.

 

(E. de B. Bewley)
Judge of the High Court

Mr Paul Leung, S.C.C., for Crown.

Mr Lambert K.C. Lee, instructed by D.L.A., for Appellant.