HKSAR v. Mang Gu Zhi Han

HCMA000936/2003

HCMA 936/2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 936 OF 2003

(ON APPEAL FROM WSCC 1184/2003)

____________

____________

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge E Toh in Court

Date of Hearing: 13 November 2003

Date of Judgment: 13 November 2003

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1.The Appellant had pleaded guilty to one charge of illegal remaining in Hong Kong and was sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment. He now appeals against that sentence on the basis that it was too lenient.

2.The facts revealed that the Appellant was found lying on the staircase near City Hall in Central. When the police officer approached him and asked for his proof of identity, the Appellant claimed that he had been on a Mainland tour and he had yet lost his passport, but later back at the police station he admitted he was an illegal immigrant.

3.The Appellant has previous record in Hong Kong. He has had 8 similar previous convictions.

4.When he was before the learned Magistrate, the Appellant had asked for a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment. The learned Magistrate in considering an appropriate sentence had referred himself to the case of The R v So Man King and Others [1989] 1 HKLR 142 and concluded that the appropriate starting point for this type of offence would normally be 15 months' imprisonment. The learned Magistrate enhanced his starting point to 3 years and reduced it to 2 years.

5.Clearly, the Appellant had not been deterred from committing the same offence time and time again by the previous sentences that he had received and so the learned Magistrate was right to adopt a higher starting point.

6.The Appellant before me expressed the opinion that the sentence was too lenient and he asked for me to impose a life imprisonment sentence on him. His reasons being that he did not wish to travel around any more and wanted a permanent place of abode. I have indicated to the Appellant that that is not within my power. He then asked to be repatriated to Taiwan and he asked for $100,000 for his medical need. Well again, it is not within my power to grant him. As to where he will be repatriated after he serves his sentence that is up to the administrative authorities.

7.The Appellant has not given any valid grounds of appeal, and I do not consider the sentence is manifestly excessive or wrong in principle, so the appeal against sentence is dismissed.

Representation:

Ms Vivien Chan, GC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, for the Respondent

The Appellant, in person