HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1995

R. v. WONG YIK CHUN

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
6519-EN-1996-04-02

R. v. WONG YIK CHUN

HTML content

CACC000687/1995

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1995, No. 687
(Criminal)

BETWEEN
THE QUEENRespondent
AND
WONG YIK CHUNApplicant

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

Coram: Hon Mortimer, J.A., Mayo, J.A. and Sears, J.

Date of hearing: 2 April 1996

Date of judgment: 2 April 1996

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

J U D G M E N T

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

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

1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction of being in possession of dangerous drugs. Police Officers gave evidence of keeping premises on 7/F of Shing Tung House in Tung Tau Estate under surveillance. They saw the applicant returning to the premises in the early morning of 7 March 1995. A search was conducted on the applicant's person and the dangerous drugs referred to in the charge were found in a waist wallet worn by him. The dangerous drugs consisted of 132.27 grammes of a mixture containing 22.92 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 10.74 grammes of cannabis.

2. According to the post recorded statement taken by one of the officers the applicant admitted that the items which had been found were dangerous drugs and claimed that they were intended for his own consumption.

3. The admissibility of the statement was contested at the trial before His Honour Judge Surman. The judge was satisfied that the statement was a voluntary statement and admitted it as evidence. The applicant did not go into the witness box.

4. The judge was satisfied that the charge had been proved beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the applicant as charged. In his grounds of appeal the applicant claims that the police "extorted him" and that the witness' statement had discrepancies.

5. Before us the applicant complained the police officer did not caution him and did not write anything in his notebook. As we have said the judge was satisfied that the statement had been made freely and voluntarily and admitted the statement of his as evidence we can see no reason to interfere with the judge's findings of fact and the application is dismissed.

(Barry Mortimer)(Simon Mayo)(R.A.W. Sears)
Justice of AppealJustice of AppealJudge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr A A Bruce for Crown Prosecutor

Wong Yik-chun - Applicant in person/present