The Queen v. Yeung Chak Man (D1) and Others

CACC000468/1985

BETWEEN

------

Coram: Roberts, C.J., Yang, J.A. and Penlington, J.

Date of hearing: 29th April, 1986.

Date of delivery of judgment: 29th April, 1986.

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

Yang, J.A.:

1. On the question of sentence we are of the view that the administering of chloroform and the subsequent removal of the vehicle were done in furtherance of the conspiracy to kidnap the lady in question. Whilst the administering of chloroform and the conspiracy could be regarded as two separate incidents, nevertheless they were so closely connected that consecutive sentences in our view might not be appropriate in the present case. Having regard to the distinct nature of these two offences and at the same time their close association, we think that justice will be served if we did the following:

2. The application for leave to appeal against sentence is treated as an appeal. The appeal is allowed. The sentence of 4 years on Count 1 and the sentence of  8  years on Count 2 to remain, but of the 4 years imposed under Count 1, 3 years will be served concurrently with Count 2 and 1 year consecutive to Count 2, thereby making a total of 9 years for each of the accused.

Representation:

G. Alderdice (John Ip & Co.) for D1

S. Westbrook (Kwan & Kwan) for D2

G. Alderdice (Haldane Midgley & Co.) for D3

G.J.X. McCoy for D.P.P./Respondent