HKSAR v. Muhammad Munsha @ Tufail Mushtaq
Read the full judgment text of CACC 412/1999 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 30 November 1999 before Stuart-Moore VP, Mayo JA, Wong JA.
Criminal law – sentencing – leave to appeal out of time – possession of counterfeit banknotes – false representation to immigration officer – whether late application justified by family health reasons – Crlmes Ordinance (Cap 200) s.100(1) – Immigration Ordinance (Cap 115) s.42(1)(a) – Applicant pleaded guilty in the District Court to having custody of 42 counterfeit HK$1,000 banknotes and to making a false representation to an immigration officer, both offences occurring in December 1998 – sentenced to 20 months and 8 months consecutive – whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted where Applicant relied on father's long-standing illness in Pakistan and wife's poor health – held that no proper reason was advanced for the late filing and the application was without merit – family circumstances, while sympathetic, could not bear on the late application or the seriousness of the offences – leave refused – one month of the period spent in custody ordered not to count towards sentence.
Legal issues: Whether to grant leave to appeal out of time against sentence
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal out of time against sentence refused.
Cited by 6 cases
|
CACC000412/1999 CACC 412/1999 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 412 OF 1999 (ON APPEAL FROM DCCC 221 OF 1999)
------------------------------- Coram: Hon. Stuart-Moore, V.-P., Mayo & Wong JJ.A. Date of Hearing: 30 November 1999 Date of Judgment: 30 November 1999 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Stuart-Moore V.-P. (giving the judgment of the Court): 1. On 26 May 1999, the Applicant pleaded guilty before Judge Line in the District Court to a charge of having custody or control of 42 counterfeit HK$1,000 banknotes, contrary to section 100(1) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200, and a charge of making a false representation to an immigration officer, contrary to section 42(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115. Both offences occurred in December 1998. The Applicant was sentenced to twenty months' imprisonment on the first charge and eight months consecutively on the second charge. The Applicant now seeks leave, out of time, to appeal against sentence. 2. No proper reason has been advanced for a late filing of the application although the Applicant has advanced his reasons for wishing to appeal against sentence. There are two separate reasons for this. The first relates to his father's health and the second to the condition of his wife. In respect of the first, we have been shown today a certificate from a doctor in Pakistan which indicates that the Applicant's father has had a long-standing illness. There is nothing new about his condition and, whilst we feel very sympathetic to the Applicant in his concern towards his father, this can have no bearing on the late application made by him to appeal against his sentence. In respect of the second matter, the Applicant has told us that his wife is unwell. This may also be so and, if it so, again he has the court's sympathy but this cannot be a factor which can affect the sentence on matters as serious as those which brought the Applicant before the court. 3. Accordingly, we do not give leave out of time. Indeed, on any view, the application is without the slightest merit and we shall order that one month of the period spent in custody by the Applicant shall not count towards his sentence.
Representation: Miss Mary Sin, S.A.D.P.P. of the Department of Justice for the Respondent. Applicant in person. |
Other judgments that cite this case