|
HCMA000147/2002
HCMA 147/2002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 147 OF 2002
(ON APPEAL FROM TMCC 191/2002)
____________
| BETWEEN |
|
|
|
HKSAR |
Respondent |
|
|
|
|
AND |
|
|
|
|
|
LIATI |
Appellant |
____________
Coram: Hon Jackson J in Court
Date of Hearing: 26 March 2002
Date of Judgment: 26 March 2002
Date of Reasons for Judgment: 3 April 2002
_______________
J U D G M E N T
_______________
1.The appellant appeals against the sentence totalling 19 months imprisonment imposed upon her on 18 January 2002.
2.The facts of the offences to which she pleaded guilty, and the reasons for the sentence imposed appear sufficiently in the Magistrate's reasons as follows:
" On the 18th January 2002 the appellant appeared before me charged with two counts of using and one count of possession of an identity card relating to another person, and one count of breaching her condition of stay.
She pleaded guilty to all 4 charges. I sentenced her to concurrent terms of 15 months' imprisonment on the 1st, 2nd, and 4th charges. On the 3rd charge, I sentenced her to 4 months' imprisonment, which I ordered to run consecutively, making a total of 19 months' imprisonment.
The appellant admitted the Prosecution's summary of facts. She admitted to overstaying in Hong Kong for over 4 years since the 20th December 1997. The identity card in question was her sister's card. Her sister had left Hong Kong. The appellant kept the card as she wanted to stay in Hong Kong. She had used it twice to open two separate bank accounts and she produced it to a police officer when asked to produce her identity documents.
The appellant had a clear record.
It was submitted that the appellant was a 25 year-old, single, Indonesian woman who had originally been a domestic helper in Hong Kong but who had overstayed here after her visa expired in December 1997. There was no evidence that she had used the card for employment purposes. Since December 1997, she had lived off the generosity of her friends.
In my view the inference was irresistible and inescapable that the appellant, an overstayer, possessed the identity card to further her illegal overstaying in Hong Kong. Following HKSAR v Chan Man Mo (MA 1059/99), I was of the view that the appropriate sentence on each of the 1st, 2nd and 4th charges on a plea of guilty was 15 months' imprisonment, which sentences I accordingly imposed. These 3 offences formed part of the same transaction and were undoubtedly committed in order to further her unlawful overstaying in Hong Kong so I ordered that these 3 sentences be served concurrently. As regards the 3rd charge, the appellant had overstayed a considerable period of time, in excess of 4 years. With reference to R v Tseung Sau Tao (MA 955/92), a starting point of 6 months' imprisonment appeared to me to be appropriate. I gave the appellant the usual one-third discount for her guilty plea and sentenced her to 4 months' imprisonment. The duration of her overstaying was of such length to require in my view that the sentence be served consecutively, which order I made. The appellant therefore was sentenced to a total of 19 months' imprisonment."
3.Before me the appellant could only advance as a reason as to why she felt that the sentence imposed upon her was excessive was her desire to return to Indonesia at the earliest opportunity.
4.I do not doubt that for one moment. However the total sentence imposed on her was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle and this appeal was dismissed.
|
(C G Jackson) |
|
Judge of the Court of First Instance |
|
High Court |
Representation:
Mr D Leung, SGC of Department of Justice, for the Respondent
Liati, the Appellant in person
|