HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1999

HKSAR v. YIP KWAN HUNG

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
19701-EN-1999-03-02

HKSAR v. YIP KWAN HUNG

HTML content

HCMA000131/1999

HCMA131/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 131 OF 1999

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

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
YIP KWAN HUNGAppellant

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

Coram : Hon Woo J. in Court

Date of hearing : 2 March 1999

Date of judgment : 2 March 1999

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

J U D G M E N T

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

 

1. The Appellant appeared before the Magistrate on 24 November 1998 when he pleaded not guilty to a charge of injection of a dangerous drug, namely, heroin hydrochloride. It was only on 4 January 1999 when the matter came up for trial that he admitted the offence and pleaded guilty.

2. According to the case ofR v Lam Wai Ping, M.A. Nos.239 and 240 of 1997 (17 June 1997, unreported), my learned brother Patrick Chan J (as he then was) held that a reduction of the sentence by a later plea by one-quarter could not be faulted. The Magistrate obviously took into account that authority. He adopted a starting point of 12 months and because of the plea, but not at the first opportunity, he reduced it by one-quarter to nine months' imprisonment.

3. I do not see the sentence being wrong in principle in any way or excessive. I therefore dismiss the appeal.

(K.H. Woo)
Judge of the Court of First Instance, High Court

Representation:

Mr William Lam, S.G.C. of DPP, for HKSAR

Appellant in person, present