HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1995

THE QUEEN v. NENITA B. BALMACEDA

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
32183-EN-1995-12-19

THE QUEEN v. NENITA B. BALMACEDA

HTML content

HCMA000997/1995

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 997 OF 1995

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

BETWEEN
THE QUEENRespondent
AND
NENITA B. BALMACEDAAppellant

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

Coram : Hon. Duffy, J. in Court

Date of hearing : 12 December 1995

Date of handing down judgment : 19 December 1995

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This was an appeal against a conviction and sentence for theft, possession of an unlawfully altered travel document and breach of condition of stay.

2. The Appellant appeared in person on the appeal and repeated the defence which she had presented at her trial. Suffice it to say that I was thoroughly unimpressed by that, and found no merit in her appeal against conviction which I dismissed.

3. So far as sentence was concerned, I was satisfied that the sentences imposed by the learned Magistrate were in all respects proper and fell within the normal range of sentences for offences of this nature. However, as an act of mercy, in order to modify the totality of the sentence, I reduced the sentence for the possession of an unlawfully altered travel document from 8 months to 4 months. The total sentence to be served, therefore, is 16 months as opposed to 20 months. The appeal against sentence was allowed to that extent.

Representation:

Mr F. Veltro, C.C., for Crown

Appellant, Nenita B. Balmaceda, in person

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