Read the full judgment text of CACC 000193/1995 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 22 August 1995 before Power V-P, Mortimer JA, Liu JA.
Criminal law – robbery – appeal against conviction – identification parade – discrepancies in evidence – appeal against sentence – discount for guilty plea – discount for assistance to police – Mo Kwong Sang guidelines – sentence reduction. The three applicants were convicted of robbery in the District Court. D1 and D3 were convicted after trial and sentenced to 5 years; D2 pleaded guilty and received 4½ years. D1 and D3 appealed against conviction on grounds of lack of identification parade and discrepancies in evidence. The Court of Appeal held that an identification parade was unnecessary as the victim could not identify the robbers, and the trial judge properly resolved the evidentiary discrepancy. Their applications were refused. D2 appealed against sentence on the basis of insufficient discount for his guilty plea and assistance to police. The court held that while the judge had discretion, the discount was inadequate. The starting point of 5 years was below the Mo Kwong Sang guidelines of 6 years, but the court declined to increase it on appeal. To give proper allowance for the plea and assistance, the sentence was reduced to 3 years.
Legal issues: Appeal against conviction – D1 and D3 · Appeal against sentence – D2
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against conviction by D1 and D3 refused. Application for leave to appeal against sentence by D2 granted; appeal allowed; sentence reduced to 3 years' imprisonment.