HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1995

R. v. LI HO FAI

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
37044-EN-1995-05-24

R. v. LI HO FAI

HTML content

HCMA000212/1995

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 212 OF 1995

____________

 

BETWEEN
THE QUEEN
AND
LI HO FAI

____________

 

Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Sears in Court

Date of hearing: 24 May 1995

Date of deelivery of judgment: 24 May 1995

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

1. This is an appeal against sentence from Mr. Wyeth at Tuen Mun. It causes complication as I dealt with 3 appeals for this man yesterday and also for the Magistrates at Tuen Mun if they split the cases up between different Magistrates.

2. As far as this particular case is concerned, he was charged that on 11th October he trafficked in 0.67 of grams of mixture which contained 0.11grams salt of esters of morphine. The Magistrate therefore should have started at a figure of 2 years' imprisonment and discounted it. He started at three years which was wrong and then gave three months for the mitigation.

3. In my judgement, the appropriate sentence for this type of offence would be 2 years' imprisonment and it should have been discounted to 18 months. However, I have a more difficult task. Yesterday, I dealt with appeals and confirmed a totality of 2 years' imprisonment for offences committed after this offence was committed. These offences was committed November and December of 1994. These offences were committed earlier and would mean that the 18 months would be consecutive to the 2 years.

4. Having regard all the particular circumstances, this man is obviously an active trafficker in the Tuen Mun area and it is right that he should be sent to prison so that he stops his trafficking. However, I think in all the circumstances of this cases, the appropriate sentence is for this offence that he will be sentenced to prison for a period of 12 months' imprisonment, that will be consecutive to the sentences he is serving as a result of the confirmation by me of the other appeals.

Representation:

Mr. William Lam, S.C.C. for Crown

Mr. Richard Wong (DLA) for Appellant

(R.A.W. Sears)
Judge of the High Court