HKSAR v. Leang Sze Keong

Read the full judgment text of CACC 566/1997 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 24 February 1998.

1. On 29 August 1997, the Appellant pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge Jackson on a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, the charge being that on 29 October 1996 at the Arrival Transit Lounge, Hong Kong International Airport, the Defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug namely 1,039.40 grammes of a mixture containing 889.60 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The drug was found strapped to the Appellant's body. He had been on a flight which had come from Bangkok and he was proposin

Cited by 11 cases

Case No.CACC 566/1997
Court
Court of Appeal
Date24 Feb 1998
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC000566/1997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No. 566
(Criminal)

BETWEEN
HKSAR
AND
Leang Sze-keong

----------------------

Coram : Hon. Power, V.P., Rogers & Stuart Moore, JJA in Court

Date of Hearing : 24 February 1998

Date of Judgment : 24 February 1998

----------------------

J U D G M E N T

----------------------

Rogers, J.A. (delivering the judgment of the Court) :

1. On 29 August 1997, the Appellant pleaded guilty before Deputy Judge Jackson on a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, the charge being that on 29 October 1996 at the Arrival Transit Lounge, Hong Kong International Airport, the Defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug namely 1,039.40 grammes of a mixture containing 889.60 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The drug was found strapped to the Appellant's body. He had been on a flight which had come from Bangkok and he was proposing to travel on to Vancouver where he would deliver those drugs. This was therefore a case of a large quantity of drugs. The offence concerned an international trafficking in those drugs.

2. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 16 years and 8 months and now seeks leave to appeal against that sentence.

3. The Judge took 25 years as the starting point for the sentence. We are satisfied that that was the correct starting point having regard to the guidelines that has been set down in the cases and in particular in the case of R. v. Lau Tak Ming & others (1990) HKLR 370. The Judge gave the usual one third discount for a guilty plea. In our view, the sentence was correct and leave to appeal is therefore refused.

(N.P. Power) (Anthony Rogers) (M. Stuart Moore)
Vice President Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal

Representation:

Mr. I.C. McWalters, S.A.D.P.P. for Department of Justice

Appellant in person