HKSAR v. Ma Wing Cheong

HCMA000859/1998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 859 OF 1998

(On Appeal from SKC 2005/98)

____________

____________

Coram: The Honourable Madam Justice Beeson in Court

Date of Hearing: 17 December 1998

Date of Judgment: 17 December 1998

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. The Appellant appeals against the sentence of 12 months' imprisonment imposed on him in the Magistracy for an offence of Possession of a Forged Identity Card.

2. The facts of the case, as set out in the Magistrate's Reasons for Sentence, showed that when the Appellant was stopped in the street, he produced a Hong Kong Identity Card in another person's name and a check to the police console indicated that the identity card was a forged one. The Appellant was arrested. Under caution, he said that he was wanted in connection with a blackmail case, and therefore did not carry his own identity card and he had actually gone to China to buy the forged identity card in Shenzhen. It was confirmed by forensic analysis that the card was a forged one.

3. The basis of this appeal is that the Appellant did not have a forged identity card in his possession to further an illegal stay in Hong Kong, or to justify that illegal stay in Hong Kong, or for any other immigration type offences. It was submitted that on that basis, the sentence of 12 months' imprisonment was manifestly excessive.

4. Having considered the facts of this case and considered the Magistrate's Reasons for Sentence, I am of the view that this is an entirely proper sentence for what was a serious offence of possession of a forged identity card. This was not possession simpliciter. The Magistrate took that into account and correctly decided that while it was not an offence connected entirely with immigration offences, it was a deliberate and planned possession of a forged identity card in an attempt to evade justice in Hong Kong for a series of serious offences.

5. I can see no reason to interfere with the Magistrate's sentence and this appeal is dismissed. I note that the Magistrate took into account the totality of this 12 month sentence in relation to the sentence for District Court offences which the Defendant was serving and she made 6 months of this sentence consecutive and 6 months concurrent with that term. I cannot fault that approach and confirm that the appeal is dismissed.

Representation:

Mr. Albert Wong, S.G.C., for D.P.P.

Mr. Wilson Chan, instructed by D.L.A., for Appellant.