HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1993

CHOI SIU-MING v. R.

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1994R. v. CHING WAI FAN, CARINA
  • CAAR12/1994R. v. TUEN Shui Ming and Another
  • CAAR13/1993R. v. WONG SHU KAN
  • CAAR3/1993R. v. NG SHEUNG CHUN
  • CAAR3/1995R. v. YU YUN HEI
  • CAAR5/1993R. v. KWOK CHI KEUNG
  • CAAR5/1995R. v. LEUNG KWOK CHUNG
  • CAAR9/1995R. v. CHAN SIU YUN
  • CACC100/1993NG YUK HUNG and Others v. R.
  • CACC100/1995R. v. CHAN LAM
  • CACC100/1996R. v. LI CHI MING
  • CACC101/1994CHAN CHONG HEI v. R.
  • CACC10/1994TAM Shing-li v. R.
  • CACC10/1996R. v. AU YEUNG CHI MAN
  • CACC102/1993LEE WING ON v. R.
  • CACC102/1994R. v. CHEUNG KIN SHING and Others
  • CACC102/1995R. v. LAI FOR-SHUN and Another
  • CACC102/1996R. v. CHOI MAN HAY
  • CACC103/1994CHAN KWOK-HING v. R.
  • CACC103/1996R. v. FUNG CHI SHING and Another
2253-EN-1993-10-26

CHOI SIU-MING v. R.

HTML content

CACC000248/1993

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1993, No 248
(Criminal)

 

__________

THE QUEEN
AND
CHOI SIU-MING

___________

 

Coram: Hon. Sir T.L. Yang, C.J., Mortimer J.A. and Sears J.

Date of hearing: 26 October 1993

Date of judgment: 26 October 1993

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

Mortimer, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court) : This applicant originally appealed against his conviction for a number of offences including criminal damage, arson, blackmail and professing to be a member of a triad society. He received a total effective sentence of five years imprisonment.

2. At the outset of this hearing he abandoned his appeal against conviction, but applies for leave to appeal against sentence out of time. No application for such leave had been made until this morning. He advances no reasons for his application for leave to appeal out of time, save that he originally intended to appeal against his conviction but was unable to raise the money to brief counsel and says that he would now like to appeal against sentence.

3. If this Court is to give leave to appeal against sentence out of time there must be some good reason for the appeal not having been launched in time. No good reason is advanced and the application is therefore refused.

4. We add that the facts of the cases show that this was extremely serious organised criminal conduct, and for such conduct, even when prosecuted in the District Court, this was a lenient sentence.

(Sir T.L. Yang)(Barry Mortimer)(R.A.W. Sears)
Chief JusticeJustice of Appealjudge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr D.G. Saw (Crown Prosecutor) for Crown/Respondent

Applicant in person