R. v. Wong Fu Keung
Read the full judgment text of CACC 158/1996 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 16 August 1996 before Nazareth VP, Bokhary JA, Ching JA.
Criminal law – immigration – trafficking in persons – sentence – leave to appeal – whether sentence manifestly excessive – concurrent terms – Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 s.37D(1)(a) – Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200 s.129(1) – Applicant and another, following pre-arrangements with persons in China, went to Ko Lau Wan pier to meet two young women arriving illegally from China by motor boat – their role to provide forged identity documents and take the women to the urban area for prostitution – applicant arrested shortly after taking the two girls onto the local ferry to Wong Shek Pier – tried in the District Court and convicted on both charges – no clear record – no guilty plea – sentenced to total of three years' imprisonment by concurrent terms of three years on the first charge and two and a half years on the second charge – applicant sought leave to appeal relying on family hardship, remorse, and request for one more chance to reform – whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted – held: no – sentencing judge rightly recognised seriousness of offences and arrived at total sentence with which the Court of Appeal could not interfere – leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted for trafficking and immigration offences
Outcome: Leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Cited by 5 cases
|
CACC000158/1996 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1996, No 158
------------------- Coram: Nazareth, V.-P., Bokhary and Ching, JJ.A. in Court Date of Hearing: 16 August 1996 Date of Judgment: 16 August 1996 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ----------------------- Bokhary, J.A.: 1. This applicant is a man in his late 30's. He faced two charges. The first was of assisting the passage within Hong Kong of unauthorised entrants, namely two young women from China, contrary to s.37D(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115. And the second charge was of trafficking in persons to Hong Kong by bringing those two women into Hong Kong for the purpose of prostitution, contrary to s. 129(1) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200. 2. He was tried before HH Judge Longley in the District Court. 3. On February 9 this year, he was convicted on both charges. And on the 29th of that month he was sentenced to a total of three years' imprisonment by way of concurrent terms of three years on the 1st charge and 21/2 years on the 2nd charge. 4. He now seeks leave to appeal against his sentence. In support: he points, in his written notice of application, to the hardship which his incarceration causes to his family; continues by asserting that he is remorseful; and ends by asking for one more chance to reform. 5. The circumstances of the offences may be taken from what the judge said to the applicant when sentencing him:
6. Neither did the applicant have a clear record nor did he plead guilty. 7. The question is simply what punishment is appropriate for his crimes. The judge rightly recognised that these were serious offences, and he arrived at a total sentence with which we cannot interfere. 8. Leave to appeal against sentence is refused.
Representation: Applicant - Wong Fu Keung - in person Mr Jackson Poon (of the Attorney General's Chambers) for the Crown |
Other judgments that cite this case