HKSAR v. Lai Kwai Shing

Read the full judgment text of CACC 43/2000 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 14 April 2000.

1. The applicant pleaded guilty to trafficking in a dangerous drug before Judge Day in the District Court and was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. The particulars of the offence were:

Cites 1 case

Case No.CACC 43/2000
Court
Court of Appeal
Date14 Apr 2000
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC000043/2000

CACC 43/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 43 OF 2000

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC 1100/1999)

__________________

BETWEEN
HKSAR Respondent
AND
LAI KWAI SHING Applicant

________________

Coram: Hon Mayo VP and Leong JA in Court

Date of Hearing: 14 April 2000

Date of Judgment: 14 April 2000

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

Mayo JA (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant pleaded guilty to trafficking in a dangerous drug before Judge Day in the District Court and was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. The particulars of the offence were:

"Particulars of Offence

LAI Kwai-shing and FUNG Kam-lin, on the 14th day of October, 1999, at Room 1, 2nd Floor, No. 34, Wood Road, Wanchai, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely, 47.27 grammes of a mixture containing 17.45 grammes of heroin hydrochloride."

2. The Judge adopted a starting point of 6 years imprisonment. This was in conformity with the tariff laid down in R v LAU Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 for this offence.

3. The applicant has prayed in aid his difficult family circumstances. The sentencing Judge was aware of these. In a case as serious as this little weight can be given to personal circumstances.

4. The applicant referred to another case which had been reported in the press where the Court of Appeal had reduced a sentence in relation to an offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The circumstances of all cases are different and very little assistance can be derived from the sentences which have been imposed in other cases.

5. The sentence was in no way manifestly excessive or wrong in principle. The application is dismissed. As the application is devoid of merit we order that 2 months of the time that the applicant has spent in custody will not count towards the sentence he is serving.

(Simon Mayo)

(Arthur Leong)

Vice-President Justice of Appeal

Representation:

Mr P K Madigan, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the respondent

Lai Kwai-shing, applicant in person

HKSAR v. Lai Kwai Shing [CACC 43/2000] | BabelCite