HKSAR v. Lung Kut Cheung

Read the full judgment text of CACC 551/1999 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 28 January 2000.

1. The applicant pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge Leung in the District Court to one count of burglary and one count of remaining in Hong Kong without the permission of the Director of Immigration. He was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for the burglary and 15 months for the immigration offence and it was ordered that the sentences be served consecutively. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against these sentences.

Case No.CACC 551/1999
Court
Court of Appeal
Date28 Jan 2000
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC000551/1999

CACC 551/1999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 551 OF 1999

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC 831/1999)

__________________

BETWEEN
HKSAR Respondent
AND
LUNG KUT CHEUNG Applicant

_____________________

Coram: Hon Stuart-Moore VP, Mayo VP and Pang J in Court

Date of Hearing: 28 January 2000

Date of Judgment: 28 January 2000

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

Hon Mayo VP (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge Leung in the District Court to one count of burglary and one count of remaining in Hong Kong without the permission of the Director of Immigration. He was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for the burglary and 15 months for the immigration offence and it was ordered that the sentences be served consecutively. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against these sentences.

2. A maid in premises at Mount Cameron Road on the Peak saw that some food she had left in the kitchen had been consumed. She went to her room and saw a Chinese male who it transpired was the applicant. The maid called the police who arrived at the scene shortly after this and it was evident that the applicant had also attempted to steal a sweater belonging to the maid.

3. On account of the somewhat pathetic circumstances of the case the Judge did not adopt the usual starting point of 3 years imprisonment for the burglary. This was understandable. The sentences which were imposed were entirely correct and proper sentences.

4. There is no merit whatever in this appeal and it is dismissed. We further order that 3 months of the time which the applicant has spent in custody will not count towards his sentence.

(M Stuart-Moore) (Simon Mayo) (K K Pang)
Vice-President Vice-President Judge of the Court of First Instance

Representation:

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

Lung Kut-cheung, applicant in person