Li Wing-tat v. The Queen
Read the full judgment text of CACC 395/1977 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The appellant in this case was convicted on his plea of guilty of possession of fire arms and ammunition without a licence. The fire arms in effect were two plastic rifles, and the ammunition was, I understand, plastic missiles for those guns. Once again I must complain of the fact that the officer in charge of the case was not present in court to assist counsel and if necessary to produce the exhibits. I have not had the opportunity of seeing the exhibits but I understand they were as I have
Cited by 9 cases
|
CACC000395/1977
Coram: Trainor, J. Date of Judgment: 25th May, 1977 ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. The appellant in this case was convicted on his plea of guilty of possession of fire arms and ammunition without a licence. The fire arms in effect were two plastic rifles, and the ammunition was, I understand, plastic missiles for those guns. Once again I must complain of the fact that the officer in charge of the case was not present in court to assist counsel and if necessary to produce the exhibits. I have not had the opportunity of seeing the exhibits but I understand they were as I have described them. 2. The appellant has been the subject of a probation officer's report which shows that he is of impeccable character; and would appear to be a person who has a reasonably bright future academically and otherwise. It has been urged by Mr. Sanguinetti who appeared on behalf of the appellant that were a conviction of possession of arms and ammunition to be recorded that would be a serious blot on the record of this youth and would militate very considerably against him were he in the future to try to emigrate, or, indeed, if he were to try to obtain employment here. To see on a person's record that he had been convicted of possession of arms and ammunition would indeed, I agree, militate very considerably against his employment. Mr. Sharwood who appeared for the Crown has added weight to what Mr. Sanguinetti has said, and agrees that a conviction recorded against this boy could jeopardise his future. I accept that, and I accept that in a case such as this where the guns and ammunition are such as can be bought without question in any toy shop in Hong Kong and are such, as, I imagine, are bought by many parents for their sons at Christmas or the New Year to record of a conviction is not essential. I endorse at the same time what the learned magistrate has said about possession of arms generally, this is a matter that must be kept very considerably under control. To allow persons in Hong Kong freely to carry weapons would be to create a position fraught with danger. But having said that I feel that in this particular case justice will be met if I allow the appeal to the extent that the appellant is discharged absolutely; the conviction not to be recorded. The order as to payment of $250 costs of the prosecution to remain. Representation: Mr. Sanguinetti (Helen A. Lo & Co.) for Appellant Mr. Sharwood, C.C. for Respondent |