HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1995

THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHUN TONG

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
16531-EN-1996-03-12

THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHUN TONG

HTML content

HCMA000916/1995

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.916 OF 1995

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

BETWEEN
THE QUEENRespondent
AND
CHAN CHUN TONGAppellant

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

Coram : Hon. Duffy, J. in Court

Date of hearing : 6 March 1996

Date of handing down judgment : 12 March 1996

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

J U D G M E N T

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

 

1. This was an appeal against a conviction for trafficking in dangerous drugs and a sentence of 30 months imposed therefor. There was only one ground of appeal worthy of consideration and that was that an alleged verbal admission made by the Appellant was admitted into evidence without the Appellant, who was unrepresented at trial, being advised of his rights to challenge its voluntariness. This technically was a ground on which I had to allow this appeal. I did so with great reluctance because had I had a power of proviso, then this would have been applied automatically in a case where the evidence against the Appellant was overwhelming. However, the failure of the learned Magistrate to advise the Appellant of his rights in relation to this statement was a material irregularity and the appeal had to be allowed on that basis.

2. As this was an important matter, there was no question but that a retrial had to be ordered. I ordered a retrial before a different Magistrate. The Appellant was released on bail of $5,000 with the condition that he report to Chai Wan police station every Monday and Friday between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm.

Representation:

Mr Albert Wong, S.C.C., for Crown

Mr Stephen Ma (D.L.A.) for Appellant on appeal against conviction

Appellant (Chan Chun Tong) in person on appeal against sentence

(J.M. Duffy)
Judge of the High Court