Lee Yuk-lan (F) v. The Queen

Read the full judgment text of CACC 1012/1977 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to three offences of possession of dangerous drugs, in this case opium, for the purpose of unlawful trafficking and to two offences of being in possession of an opium pipe. She was sentenced to sentences of three and a half years' imprisonment on each of the possession charges and to one year on each of the charges concerning the opium pipes. All the sentences were ordered to be served concurrently.

Case No.CACC 1012/1977
Court
Court of Appeal
Date
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC001012/1977

IN THE SUPREME COURT Criminal Appeal
  1977 No.1012

BETWEEN:    
  LEE Yuk-lan (F) Appellant
  and  
  THE QUEEN Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Pickering, J.A. and Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment: 24th October, 1977.

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to three offences of possession of dangerous drugs, in this case opium, for the purpose of unlawful trafficking and to two offences of being in possession of an opium pipe. She was sentenced to sentences of three and a half years' imprisonment on each of the possession charges and to one year on each of the charges concerning the opium pipes. All the sentences were ordered to be served concurrently.

2. The appellant, who is a woman, has five children. Shortly after the birth of the youngest of these children, her husband deserted her. She then succumbed to the temptation of allowing her flat to be used as a place to store a considerable quantity of opium and opium dross and two opium pipes. It was not suggested that she was keeping her flat as a divan.

3. Counsel, who appeared for the appellant, pointed out the unfortunate circumstances concerning the commission of this offence. He also referred to the fact that the courts considered possession of opium in a very different way from possession of other dangerous drugs.

4. We think that the total sentence of three and a half years for possession of what amounted to some two pounds of opium in the particular circumstances of this case is an excessive sentence and we allowed the appeal to the extent that a sentence of two and a half years' imprisonment will be substituted for each of the sentences of three and a half years passed on the appellant. The sentences are to be served concurrently.

  (Geoffrey Briggs)
  President.

Representation:

Goodbody (Alfred Lau & Co.) for appellant.

Boase for the Crown/Respondent.