HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1996

R. v. LAU CHOY YAU

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
5607-EN-1997-03-30

R. v. LAU CHOY YAU

HTML content

CACC000567/1996

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1996, No.567

(Criminal)

_____________________

BETWEEN
THE QUEEN
and
LAU CHOY YAU

_____________________

Coram: Power, Ag. C.J., Mayo, J.A. & Stuart-Moore, J.

Date of hearing: 30 March 1997

Date of judgment: 30 March 1997

_____________________

J U D G M E N T

_____________________

Stuart-Moore, J. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. This applicant was convicted on 11th September 1996 following a trial in the District Court before H.H. Judge Sweeney. Sentence was imposed on 25th September 1996, after a report had been obtained from the Addiction Treatment Centre at Hei Ling Chau. On the first charge of possessing a mixture containing 19.54 grammes of heroin he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment and on the second charge of resisting a police officer, contrary to section 63 of the Police Force Ordinance, Cap.232, he received a period of one month's imprisonment to be served consecutively.

2. The Applicant complains in his written grounds of appeal against conviction that the evidence of the 1st and 2nd prosecution witnesses was contradictory. Having carefully considered the learned judge's Reasons for Verdict, it is clear that he bore in mind those "minor discrepancies" as he rightly described them.

3. The evidence against the Applicant was overwhelming. There is no merit in the Applicant's written grounds, and there is no substance in his complaints raised this morning. We refuse leave to appeal against the conviction.

4. Turning now to the sentence of three years' imprisonment on the first charge. The Applicant has a long history of drug abuse. He was understandably regarded as wholly unsuitable for a place at the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre. The sentence was, in our judgment, neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive. The application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

(N.P. Power)(Simon Mayo)(M. Stuart-Moore)
Ag. Chief JusticeJustice of AppealJudge of the
High Court

Representation:

Mr. Johnny Chan, C.C. for the Respondent.

Applicant in person.