HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1994

R. v. WONG KWOK YING

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
4443-EN-1995-04-27

R. v. WONG KWOK YING

HTML content

CACC000453/1994

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1994, No. 453
(Criminal)

__________

 

BETWEEN
THE QUEEN
AND
WONG KWOK YING

__________

 

Coram: Power, V.-P., Litton, V.-P. and Bokhary, J.A.

Date of hearing: 27 April 1995

Date of judgment: 27 April 1995

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

 

Bokhary, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. This is an application for leave to appeal against conviction.

2. The applicant was tried in the High Court. He faced two counts of robbery. One robbery was at a jewellery shop in Nathan Road on September 18, 1989. $2.3 million worth of jewellery was taken. There were several robbers. It was the prosecution's case that the applicant was one of the robbers. The other robbery was at a jewellery shop in Canton Road on November 6 of the same year. $2.2 million worth of jewellery was taken. Again there were several robbers. And again it was the prosecution's case that the applicant was one of the robbers.

3. On August 25 last year, the jury convicted the applicant on both counts. The verdicts were unanimous.

4. The evidence against the applicant took the form of confession statements and accomplice evidence.

5. He has filed grounds of appeal. In them he complains of irregularity, mis-reception of evidence, misdirection and non-direction. His grounds also raise certain points on the facts. All his grounds were developed in oral argument presented by him in person.

6. It is unnecessary for us to detail the arguments. Suffice it to say that we have considered them and considered them in their context. Having done so, we find them to be without substance. There was ample evidence on which to convict. And there was nothing to vitiate the jury's verdicts.

7. We refuse leave to appeal.

(N P Power)(Henry Litton)(K Bokhary)
Vice PresidentVice PresidentJustice of Appeal

Representation:

Applicant in person

Mr M.C. Blanchflower (of the Attorney General's Chambers) for the prosecution