HKSAR v. Cheung Suet Ying
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 1184/1998 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 10 March 1999.
1. The appellant was caught on 12 November 1998, when she admitted she had sneaked into Hong Kong as an illegal immigrant from China. She carried with her somebody else's ID card that she had bought in China. She was charged with being an illegal immigrant and being in possession of an ID card she held out to be her own.
|
HCMA001184/1998 HCMA1184/98 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1184 OF 1998 (On appeal from ESC 3842 of 1998) --------------
-------------- Coram : Deputy Judge Gill in Court Date of hearing : 10 March 1999 Date of judgment : 10 March 1999 ---------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------- 1. The appellant was caught on 12 November 1998, when she admitted she had sneaked into Hong Kong as an illegal immigrant from China. She carried with her somebody else's ID card that she had bought in China. She was charged with being an illegal immigrant and being in possession of an ID card she held out to be her own. 2. Before G Tallentyre Esquire, principal magistrate, she pleaded guilty to both charges, agreed with the prosecution's summary of facts outlined above and was sentenced, in accordance with established guidelines, to imprisonment of 15 months for each charge, to be served concurrently. 3. On 25 November she lodged a notice of appeal against sentence on the grounds it was too severe. By letter, dated 28 February 1999, she has written to the court claiming not, after all, to being an illegal immigrant but an overstayer, having come to Hong Kong lawfully on a two-way permit in her own name on 12 March 1996. She did not return to China and has been here ever since. 4. Notwithstanding the shortness of notice, the learned prosecutor has caused a check to be made in the records of the Immigration Department. Those disclose that from January 1996 to November 1998 there is no sign of anyone of the appellant's name having entered Hong Kong through lawful channels. 5. I find in the circumstances there is no semblance of truth in the appellant's claim that she is innocent of the charge of being an II, and treating her informal letter as an application to be re-tried on that charge, I dismiss the application. 6. There is no valid ground before me to alter the sentences for either of the charges or the manner in which they should be served. 7. The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
Representation: Mr David CHAN, Senior Government Counsel, for Respondent CHEUNG Suet-ying, Appellant, in Person
|