R. v. Wong Wing Hei
Read the full judgment text of CACC 17/1995 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 7 June 1995.
1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction for trafficking in a dangerous drug on the ground that there was discrepancy in the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution.
|
CACC000017/1995 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1995, No. 17 _______________
_______________ Coram: Hon Yang, C.J., Power, V.-P. and Mortimer, J.A. Date of hearing: 7 June 1995 Date of judgment: 7 June 1995 ________________ J U D G M E N T ________________ Hon Yang, C.J.: 1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction for trafficking in a dangerous drug on the ground that there was discrepancy in the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. 2. The judge, in his Reasons for Verdict, quite correctly identified the issue in the case as one of fact. The prosecution's evidence was that the drug were found on the applicant's person whilst the applicant said that they were found elsewhere and that he was framed by the police. 3. There was indeed a discrepancy between the evidence given by the prosecution's witness in chief and the evidence he gave whilst he was under cross-examination. 4. In chief he said that he opened the packet of drugs and then asked the accused what it was, but under cross-examination he said:
5. The judge was of the opinion that this was not a material inconsistency on a fact in issue. Further, he found that the applicant was utterly lacking in credibility. 6. We are of the judgment that the learned trial judge was entirely correct in his approach to the evidence given by the sole prosecution witness. There is nothing in the applicant's ground of appeal which leads us to suspect that the verdict might have been unsafe or unsatisfactory. 7. The application is accordingly dismissed.
Representation: Applicant - in person Mr A A Bruce of the Attorney General's Chambers for Crown/Respondent |