The Queen v. Law Man

CACC000101/1983

[Loss of time: guidance to applicants.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

BETWEEN

_________

Coram: McMullin, V.-P., Li & Silke, JJ. A

Date: 31st March 1983

__________

JUDGMENT

__________

Silke, J.A.:

1. The applicant was convicted on his own plea of an offence of assisting the passage to Hong Kong of unauthorised entrants.

2. He and the fellow accused, CHOW Chui, had picked up fifteen intended illegal immigrants in She Hau with a motorized sampan.

3. The applicant was the steersman and the co-defendant was sitting in the stern. When they came off Lau Fau Shan they were stopped by a Marine police Patrol boat and that led to the charge being laid.

4. The illegal immigrants were two males, four females, three boy children and five girl children. The price for the journey varied between $2,500 and $10,000 per head.

5. The applicant, who appears in person, submits he has a sense of grievance because his co-defendant who was aged 22 - the applicant being aged 28 - received three years' imprisonment whereas he received four. He also said that the second defendant had two previous convictions and should have got more than he himself who had none.

6. The judge was fully aware of the previous records or lack of them - of the two persons appearing in front of him. He considered the two previous convictions of the second defendant to be of minor significance.

7. It seems to us that, if anything, the second defendant was somewhat lucky. We note that he has had the good sense to abandon his application for leave to appeal against sentence.

8. The sentence imposed upon this applicant was in no way wrong in principle or in any way excessive. It was, if anything, lenient. It has been said by this Court before that the bringing of illegal immigrants to Hong Kong affects everyone who lives in here and is not to be encouraged.

9. The application for leave to appeal is refused and there will be a loss of time of 30 days - that is 30 days of the period spent in custody as between the application being filed and today will not count towards sentence.

Loss of time

10. This Court's power to order loss of time is limited, as the law presently stands, by the provisions of section 83W of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.

11. By virtue of this section any direction for loss of time must be confined to the period between the date when the application for leave to appeal was lodged and the date on which that application is determined by this Court.

12. A direction for loss of time will specify a certain number of days.

13. If this Court considers that an application has no merit a direction for loss of time will normally be given whether the applicant is represented or not. This will apply to applications for leave to appeal against conviction, or against sentence, or both.

Representation:

Applicant in person.

C.G. Jackson, Esq. for Crown/Respondent.