HKSAR v. Lau Kwok Keung
Read the full judgment text of CACC 42/2005 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 10 March 2006.
1. In an affirmation dated 16 June 2005, the applicant has sought the leave of this court to treat as a nullity his abandonment of an application for leave to appeal against his conviction in the District Court on 12 January 2005, following a trial before Deputy Judge Thomas for trafficking in methamphetamine hydrochloride. The reason he gave for abandoning the original application was that he had no lawyer to represent him at the hearing on 13 June 2005. He went on to say that it was only lat
Cites 1 case
|
CACC 42/2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL criminal APPEAL NO. 42 OF 2005 (ON APPEAL FROM DCCC NO. 1021 of 2004) ____________________ BETWEEN
____________________ Before: Hon Stuart-Moore Ag CJHC, Suffiad and McMahon JJ Date of Hearing: 10 March 2006 Date of Judgment: 10 March 2006 ______________________ J U D G M E N T ______________________ Stuart-Moore, Ag CHJC (giving the judgment of the Court): 1.In an affirmation dated 16 June 2005, the applicant has sought the leave of this court to treat as a nullity his abandonment of an application for leave to appeal against his conviction in the District Court on 12 January 2005, following a trial before Deputy Judge Thomas for trafficking in methamphetamine hydrochloride. The reason he gave for abandoning the original application was that he had no lawyer to represent him at the hearing on 13 June 2005. He went on to say that it was only later, when his family agreed to engage a lawyer for him, that he decided to reinstate his application. It can readily be seen from his account, which he has repeated in these proceedings today, that the abandonment was a deliberate and informed decision (See: HKSAR v Lai Siu Cheung [2005] 1 HKLRD 1 para. 28 following R v Medway [1976] 62 Cr App R 85). 2.Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
Mr David C Leung, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent. The Applicant, in person. |
Cases cited in this judgment