HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal2001

HKSAR v. TSUI YIN FUN

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
5570-EN-2002-04-16

HKSAR v. TSUI YIN FUN

HTML content

CACC000563/2001

CACC 563/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 563 OF 2001

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCC 122/2000)

____________

 

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
TSUI YIN FUNAppellant

____________

Coram: Hon Stuart Moore VP and Hon Seagroatt J in Court

Date of Hearing: 16 April 2002

Date of Judgment: 16 April 2002

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

Seagroatt J (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence out of time. The sentence was itself imposed on 27 June 2000 when the applicant pleaded guilty to 3 offences of trafficking in heroin. In Count 1, 24.56 grammes of heroin were concerned; in Count 2, 30.2 grams of heroin were involved and in Count 3, 96.27 grammes of heroin. That was a total of just over 151 grammes.

2. The Applicant appeared before Gall J who took a starting point for sentence of 11 years, the range in accordance with the tariff set out in Lau Tak Ming being 8 to 12 years after trial. Taking into account the mitigation and the pleas of guilty the learned judge imposed a term of 4 years on the 1st count, 41/2 years on the 2nd count and 6 years on the 3rd count, all terms to run concurrently, making a total of 6 years. It is clear that the learned judge had taken into account a number of humane considerations in arriving at the substantially discounted sentence of 6 years which included a consideration of the family circumstances at that time, in particular the effect that a period the imprisonment would have upon the upbringing of those children. The Applicant was most fortunate to have received such a merciful sentence.

3. In her application today the Applicant has stressed once again the family considerations but we are satisfied that there is no ground for interfering with the sentence imposed upon her. In those circumstances the application is dismissed.

(Michael Stuart-Moore)(Conrad Seagroatt)
Vice PresidentJudge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr Alex Lee, SGC, Department of Justice, for the Respondent

The Applicant, Tsui Yin-fun, in person