R. v. Liu Ka Fai
Read the full judgment text of CACC 446/1995 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 9 January 1996.
1. On May 23 last year, this applicant, a man in his mid 30's, pleaded guilty before HH Judge McMahon to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, namely 25.54 gms of a mixture containing 18.19 gms of salts of esters of morphine. In order to learn more about the applicant's background, the judge sent for a probation report. Sentence was passed on June 13 last year. The applicant was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. He now seeks leave to appeal against that sentence, contending that it
|
CACC000446/1995 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1995, No. 446
------------------- Coram: Bokhary, J.A. and Bewley, J. in Court Date of Hearing: 9 January 1996 Date of Judgment: 9 January 1996 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ----------------------- Bokhary, J.A.: 1. On May 23 last year, this applicant, a man in his mid 30's, pleaded guilty before HH Judge McMahon to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, namely 25.54 gms of a mixture containing 18.19 gms of salts of esters of morphine. In order to learn more about the applicant's background, the judge sent for a probation report. Sentence was passed on June 13 last year. The applicant was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. He now seeks leave to appeal against that sentence, contending that it is excessive. 2. The drugs in question, which were found on the applicant on April 19, 1993, were contained in 102 plastic straws. 3. While the applicant has been in trouble with the law before, this was his first conviction for trafficking. 4. The judge took a starting point of 51/2 years' imprisonment. 5. From that starting point, he allowed a discount of 11/2 years for the available mitigation, principally the guilty plea. 6. The applicant is right when he says that the discount given to him was on the low side. But we are concerned with the net result. And the starting point was also on the low side. 7. In our judgment, the sentence which was passed cannot be faulted as either wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. So there is no scope for us to intervene; and we refuse leave to appeal.
Representation: Mr David Chan (of the Attorney General's Chambers) for the prosecution Liu Ka Fai, applicant in person |