HKSAR v. Chan Yuet Wing
Read the full judgment text of CACC 212/2002 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 16 July 2002.
1. Notwithstanding what the applicant says this was a case of burglary of commercial premises. The fact that he was under the influence of alcohol is not a mitigating factor.
Cites 1 case
|
CACC000212/2002 CACC 212/2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 212 OF 2002 (ON APPEAL FROM DCCC 249 OF 2002) ______________
______________ Coram: Hon Mayo VP in Court Date of Hearing: 16 July 2002 Date of Judgment: 16 July 2002 _______________ J U D G M E N T _______________ 1.Notwithstanding what the applicant says this was a case of burglary of commercial premises. The fact that he was under the influence of alcohol is not a mitigating factor. 2.There were no special circumstances such as to justify a departure from the guideline starting point of 21/2 years' imprisonment for the burglary of commercial premises. There is also no reason to doubt the accuracy of the statements made by Mr Mui his legal adviser on affidavit. 3.This application for leave to appeal against sentence is accordingly dismissed.
Representation: Miss Lily Wong, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent. Applicant in person. |
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under CACC 212/2002