HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal2004

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THI HONG ANH

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
36449-EN-2004-01-24

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THI HONG ANH

HTML content

HCMA000001/2004

HCMA1/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.1 OF 2004

(ON APPEAL FROM TMCC3883 OF 2003)

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

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
NGUYEN THI HONG ANHAppellant

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

Coram: Deputy Judge M. Poon in Court

Date of Hearing: 24 January 2004

Date of Judgment: 24 January 2004

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. The appellant was stopped by police officers and it was discovered that she was an illegal immigrant. She pleaded guilty to one charge of illegal remaining in Hong Kong.

2. By commission of the present offence, she admitted that she was also in breach of a suspended sentence imposed on her relating to a charge of breach of condition of stay.

3. The grounds of appeal against sentence that she advances today is that she has a son back in Vietnam who has heart disease and she was deserted by her husband. She has to go back to take care of the son. She also told the court that she came to Hong Kong for economic reasons.

4. The magistrate had heard mitigation advanced but rightly found that there was none constituting humanitarian grounds. He imposed 15 months' imprisonment on the appellant's plea of guilty. This is a perfectly appropriate sentence and is in accordance with the sentencing guideline laid down in the case of R. v. So Man King [1989] 1 HKLR 142.

5. The fact that the appellant committed the present offence during the operation period of the suspended sentence demonstrated a flagrant disregard of the law of Hong Kong. The magistrate could not have come to any conclusion other than an activation of the suspended sentence and to order such to run consecutively to the sentence in respect of the present case.

6. The sentence is neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle. What is advanced today does not amount to humanitarian grounds and I affirm the sentence and dismiss the appeal accordingly.

(M. Poon)
Deputy High Court Judge

Representation:

Appellant in person, present

Mr Simon Tso Yum Man, SGC of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR