The Queen v. Wong Keung
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 212/1991 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 24 April 1991.
1. The appellant pleaded guilty to (A) Using an unlawfully obtained Portuguese passport, and (B) Making a false representation to an Immigration Assistant to be Lau Sau-kok born on 10th October 1955 in Macau.
|
HCMA000212/1991 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 212/91 ------------------------------------------------------------ BETWEEN
------------------ Coram: Hon. Yang, C.J. Date of Hearing: 24 April 1991 Date of Judgment: 24 April 1991 ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- Hon. Yang, C.J.: 1. The appellant pleaded guilty to (A) Using an unlawfully obtained Portuguese passport, and (B) Making a false representation to an Immigration Assistant to be Lau Sau-kok born on 10th October 1955 in Macau. 2. On 21st December 1990 the appellant arrived in Hong Kong from China using the unlawfully obtained Portguese passport for arrival examination and falsely representing himself to be the person named in the passport. 3. He was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment on the (A) charge and 6 months on the (B) charge sentences to run concurrently. 4. This is his appeal against those sentences. 5. The appellant has a right of stay in and entry into Hong Kong. He had travelled in and out of Hong Kong legally on many occasions previously. He holds a senior position in a local company here. 6. I am grateful to counsel for the appellant for submitting a letter from the Immigration Department with a table of sentences in the period from 1.1.90 to 28.2.91 for this type of offence relating to Hong Kong residents. I reproduce the table:
7. The appellant has been in custody since 21st December 1990. 8. In my judgment the tariff of 15 months' imprisonment laid down to deter illegal immigrants from China is not applicable to Hong Kong residents, for these are not in Hong Kong illegally and the purpose for imposing a sentence of 15 months to discourage illegal immigrants is hardly relevant in respect of those who are entitled to be in Hong Kong. 9. Appeal allowed. Sentences reduced to enable the appellant to be released today, which in effect means that the appellant was given a sentence of about six months. En passant, I might add that six months does seem too heavy in any event, in all the circumstances of the case.
Representation: Mr. Steve Chui for Crown/respondent Mr. Alan Hoo, Q.C. & Mr. Ronald E. Mayne (Derek B.K. Quan & Co) for appellant |