HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1999

HKSAR v. TSE SIU SHEUNG

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
33449-EN-1999-05-21

HKSAR v. TSE SIU SHEUNG

HTML content

HCMA000196/1999

1999, HCMA 196

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 196 OF 1999

_______________

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
TSE SIU SHEUNGAppellant

________________

Coram: The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary in Court

Dates of Hearing: 21 May 1999 and 23 June 1999

Dates of Delivery of Judgment: 21 May 1999 (Conviction) and 23rd June 1999 (Sentence)

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

 

1. This Appellant appeared before Michael C. Jenkins, Esquire and pleaded not guilty to one charge of theft. He was convicted on the 22nd January 1999 and was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.

2. He now appeals against both conviction and sentence. He has lodged a Notice of Appeal against conviction in the standard form but has written no ground of appeal thereon. In his Statement of Findings, the Magistrate has carefully considered all the evidence before him before convicting the Appellant.

3. In my view, there is ample evidence for the Magistrate to convict. The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

4. As far as his appeal against sentence is concerned, it was adjourned for one month in order for the prosecution to make the necessary inquires.

5. At the adjourned hearing of the appeal against sentence, the Appellant abandons his appeal; and his appeal against sentence is therefore dismissed.

(V. Bokhary)
Judge of the Court of First Instance,
High Court

Representation:

TSE Siu-sheung, Appellant in person

Mr Hayson K.S. Tse (Department of Justice) for the Respondent (21.5.99)

Mr. Winston Chan (Department of Justice) for the Respondent (23.6.99)