John Richard Duffy v. The Queen
Read the full judgment text of CACC 353/1975 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. This is an appeal against two summonses brought under the provisions of the Post Office Ordinance. The appellant appealed both against his conviction and sentences.
|
CACC000353/1975 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 353 OF 1975 -----------------
Coram: Briggs, C.J. Date of Judgment: 4th June, 1975. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. This is an appeal against two summonses brought under the provisions of the Post Office Ordinance. The appellant appealed both against his conviction and sentences. 2. I dismissed the appeal against conviction. The first summons was for the offence of bringing letters into Hong Kong without lawful authority and the second summons was for being in possession of such letters. Both summonses lay under section 6 of the Post Office Ordinance. The magistrate imposed a fine of $250 on each of the two summonses. In my view that is wrong, the facts showed that the two offences formed one act. 3. I therefore allowed the appeal against sentence to the extent of remitting the fine of $250 on the second summons, that is the summons for being in possession of letters brought into Hong Kong without authority. If the fine has been paid it must be returned to the appellant.
Representation: Hampton (G. Hampton & Winter) for appellant. Stevenson for crown. |