THE QUEEN v. CHEN JU WEN
HTML content
HCMA000164/1992
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG
(Appellate Jurisdiction)
MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 164 OF 1992
---------------
BETWWEN
| THE QUEEN | ||
| AND | ||
| CHEN JU WEN |
--------------
Coram: Hon. Penlington, J.A. in Court (sitting as an additional High Court Judge)
Date of hearing: 23 April 1992
Date of delivery of judgment: 23 April 1992
------------------------
J U D G M E N T
-----------------------
1. This is an appeal against sentences passed for the offence of possession of a forged British Passport and of a forged Hong Kong Identity Card. The appellant, a resident of the Peoples Republic of China, was found with others at Kai Tak Airport about to board a flight to Japan where apparently he had been promised employment.
2. The appellant pleaded guilty to the offences and naturally has no previous convictions in Hong Kong. He was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for each charge, to be served concurrently. The trial magistrate said he took a starting point of 18 months' imprisonment and reduced that to reflect the plea of guilty and the appellant's clear record.
3. Nothing was said to the magistrate about the appellant's family background but he now tells me that his wife has recently given birth to a child, that his other child has hepatitis and his mother has cancer. A medical certificate has been produced to support that allegation.
4. I am satisfied that the sentences passed by the magistrate were, if anything, lenient. In the case of The Queen v. Yu Wing Wut, Crim. App. No. 346, the Court of Appeal considered that the sentence on a plea of guilty of 18 months' imprisonment was proper for this type of offence and that if a person is found in these circumstances in possession of both a forged passport and a forged identity card the sentences should not be entirely concurrent.
5. Even taking into account, therefore; the matters which have been raised here which were not before the magistrate I am still satisfied that the sentence passed was a perfectly proper one and the appeal is dismissed.
| (R.G. Penlington) | |
| Justice of Appeal |
Representation:
Appellant, Chen Ju Wen, in person
Paul Leung for Crown