HKSAR v. Nwaukwu, Justin C.

CACC000313/1997

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No. 313
(Criminal)

______________

______________

Coram: Hon. Liu, J.A., Mayo, J.A. and Stuart-Moore, J. in Court

Date of hearing: 12 November 1997

Date of delivery of judgment: 12 November 1997

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

Mayo, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The Applicant was charged with trafficking in 26.22 grams of a mixture containing 1.97 grams of cocaine and 21.38 grams of cocaine hydrochloride. After a trial in the District Court before H.H. Judge Whaley, he was convicted and sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment. He sought leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence. However he withdrew the application to appeal against sentence and this application is dismissed.

2. The facts were quite simple. Detective Senior Inspector Mattinson through an informer was introduced to the Applicant. The inspector had said that he was interested in acquiring a quantity of cocaine. After several abortive starts a meeting was arranged outside the Sheraton Hotel in Middle Road, Tsim Sha Tsui on the evening of 9th January 1997. The Applicant was stated to have said that he had the stuff. It was agreed that they should go into the bar in the hotel and complete the transaction there. A price was agreed and it was further agreed that they would both repair to the toilet where the cocaine could be examined and given to the inspector. The inspector had brought with him HK$20,000 in marked notes and he also had a further HK$3,000. The dangerous drugs were given to the inspector and he gave the marked HK$20,000 to the Applicant and said he would let him have the remaining HK$3,000 later. The inspector then gave a pre-agreed signal to other police officers who were in the bar and they came across and arrested the Applicant. The Applicant said several times 'I am not the one'.

3. The Inspector gave evidence how he had safeguarded the evidential integrity of the dangerous drugs before they were passed on to another police officer who in turn passed them on to the Government Chemist.

4. The Judge accepted the inspector as a truthful and reliable witness.

5. The Applicant did not give evidence or call any witnesses at his trial. In effect he put the prosecution to formal proof.

6. The Judge was satisfied that the prosecution had proved the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and convicted the Applicant.

7. The Applicant does not in his grounds of appeal raise any matters which cast a doubt upon this conviction.

8. Before us he was unable to formulate any further matters.

9. There is no merit in any of the matters which are raised.

10. The conviction is in no way unsafe or unsatisfactory and this application is dismissed.

Representation:

Mr. D.G. Saw, S.C. & Miss Winsome Chan (D.P.P.) for Respondent

Nwaukwu , Justin C., Applicant in person