HKSAR v. Alcaide, Caroline Vilaga
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 279/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 8 August 2017.
1. This in an appeal against sentence by the appellant, Alcaide, Caroline Vilaga, against the sentences imposed upon her by Mr Colin Wong, sitting in the Fanling Magistrates’ Courts, in respect of three charges, the first charge being a breach of condition of stay, by overstaying by five years and six and a half months; the second, a breach of condition of stay by taking up employment, working as a cleaner; and the third being in possession of a forged identity card which was used to obtain the
Cites 3 cases
|
HCMA 279/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO 279 OF 2017 (ON APPEAL FROM FLCC 1596 OF 2017) ______________________ BETWEEN
______________________
________________ J U D G M E N T ________________ 1.This in an appeal against sentence by the appellant, Alcaide, Caroline Vilaga, against the sentences imposed upon her by Mr Colin Wong, sitting in the Fanling Magistrates’ Courts, in respect of three charges, the first charge being a breach of condition of stay, by overstaying by five years and six and a half months; the second, a breach of condition of stay by taking up employment, working as a cleaner; and the third being in possession of a forged identity card which was used to obtain the employment as a cleaner. 2.As a result of her pleas of guilty before the Fanling Magistrates’ Courts, the appellant was sentenced, on 29 April 2017, to five months’ imprisonment on Charge 1, the breach of stay by overstaying; two months’ imprisonment on Charge 2, the breach of condition of stay in taking up employment; and 15 months on Charge 3, the possession of a forged identification card. The learned magistrate ordered that all those sentences were to run concurrently with each other, making a total of 15 months. 3.In this appeal, the appellant maintained that her sentence was too severe. 4.Having heard the explanation of the respondent in this matter and being referred to a number of authorities: HKSAR v Tran Viet Thanh [2012] 1 HKLRD 903, HKSAR v Tiongson Patricia Manalad [2002] 2 HKLRD 681, HKSAR v Li Chang Li [2004-2005] HKCLRT 193 and HKSAR v MD SAKIB Ahmed, HCMA 851/2012, I am satisfied that the magistrate in exercising his powers of sentencing did so wholly appropriately and in accordance with the authorities. 5.I hereby dismiss this appeal. There is no order as to costs.
Mr Pierre Lui, PP of the Department of Justice, for the respondent The appellant appeared in person |