HKSAR v. Chan Chi-on
Read the full judgment text of CACC 404/2001 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 14 March 2002.
1. On 1 March 2001, the Applicant, aged 28, pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge McMahon to two counts of trafficking in heroin hydrochloride. The combined mixtures containing heroin had a narcotic content of approximately 1.15 kilogrammes.
|
CACC000404/2001 CACC 404/2001 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 404 OF 2001 (ON APPEAL FROM HCCC 388 OF 2000) ______________
______________ Coram: Hon Stuart-Moore VP and Lugar-Mawson J Date of Hearing: 14 March 2002 Date of Judgment: 14 March 2002 _______________ J U D G M E N T _______________ Stuart-Moore VP (giving the judgment of the Court): 1.On 1 March 2001, the Applicant, aged 28, pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge McMahon to two counts of trafficking in heroin hydrochloride. The combined mixtures containing heroin had a narcotic content of approximately 1.15 kilogrammes. 2.The Applicant was sentenced to a total of fourteen years' imprisonment after the judge had taken a notional starting point for the two offences of twenty-one years. This was entirely in accordance with the guidelines as the Applicant, better than most, will be aware. He comes before the court with six previous convictions, including offences for robbery and trafficking in dangerous drugs. 3.The Applicant now seeks leave to appeal against sentence, approximately six months out of time, complaining of a number of mental problems from which he and his family have been suffering as a result of his incarceration. 4.The Applicant also pointed out that he had given to the police whatever assistance he could at the time of his arrest. His co-operation, however, has led nowhere and it has therefore to be regarded as valueless. In the event that the information he has been able to give is acted upon in the future, the Applicant can, of course, petition for executive clemency. 5.The Applicant attributed his lateness in filing a notice of appeal to his feelings of depression. This, in the circumstances, cannot be regarded as a sufficient reason for this court to grant leave to proceed out of time. 6.Furthermore, there is no merit whatever in the application. He was a courier for a very substantial amount of heroin on this occasion, and the facts of his earlier conviction for trafficking again reveal him to have been acting as a courier. 7.Accordingly, we refuse leave out of time and the application is dismissed.
Representation: Mr P.K. Madigan, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent. Applicant in person. |