Read the full judgment text of CAAR 000008/2000 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 13 March 2001 before Stuart-Moore VP, Stock JA, Lugar-Mawson J.
Criminal law – sentencing – review of sentence under s.81A Criminal Procedure Ordinance – conspiracy to defraud – long firm fraud – whether suspended sentence of three years' imprisonment authorised by law – s.109B Criminal Procedure Ordinance permits suspension only of sentences of no more than two years – three-year term cannot be suspended – suspended sentence of three years quashed as wrong in law – whether sentence otherwise manifestly inadequate – sentencing judge's reasons for suspension – five-year delay between unconditional bail and rearrest – whether delay amounted to exceptional circumstance warranting suspension – starting point of four years – lesser role than principal conspirator – goods largely recovered – Court of Appeal substituted two years' imprisonment suspended for three years – Chow Chak-man disapproved in HKSAR v Wong Yiu-kuen CACC 463/2000 – community service order not appropriate disposal.
Legal issues: Whether the suspended sentence of three years was authorised by law · Whether the suspended sentence was manifestly inadequate
Outcome: Application for review of sentence allowed; original three-year suspended sentence quashed and substituted with a sentence of two years' imprisonment suspended for three years.
Cited by 6 cases · Cites 1 case