HKSAR v. Lo Kin Sum
Read the full judgment text of CACC 335/1998 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 2 December 1998.
1. On 10th June 1998, the Applicant was convicted of trafficking in a mixture containing 42.64 grammes of heroin hydrochloride following a trial before Deputy Judge Ma. He was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment. Although he put in a notice of application for leave to appeal against conviction, he has not sought to pursue this. Accordingly, we can dismiss that application. He has, however, invited the court to consider whether the sentence of seven years' imprisonment was one that was, in the
|
CACC000335/1998 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL 1998, No.335
------------------------------- Coram: Power, V.-P., Rogers & Stuart-Moore, JJ.A. Date of Hearing: 2 December 1998 Date of Judgment: 2 December 1998 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Stuart-Moore, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court): 1. On 10th June 1998, the Applicant was convicted of trafficking in a mixture containing 42.64 grammes of heroin hydrochloride following a trial before Deputy Judge Ma. He was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment. Although he put in a notice of application for leave to appeal against conviction, he has not sought to pursue this. Accordingly, we can dismiss that application. He has, however, invited the court to consider whether the sentence of seven years' imprisonment was one that was, in the circumstances, too heavy. 2. This case was a straightforward one where the drugs were found in a flat occupied by the Applicant. He took immediate responsibility for the drugs no doubt in order to make it clear to the police who arrested him that other members of his family were not involved in the offence. 3. The judge clearly had the guidelines in R v Lau Tak-ming in mind when he passed sentence which he described as a "tariff" sentence. There is no doubt in the mind of this court that the sentence was entirely appropriate for an offence of this gravity. 4. The application is dismissed.
Representation: Mr. D.G. Saw, S.C. & Mr. Richard Ma, G.C. for D.P.P./Respondent Applicant in person. |