HKSAR v. Zhu Fangxin

HCMA174/2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 174 OF 2007

(ON APPEAL FROM STCC 349 OF 2007)

_______________

BETWEEN

_______________

Before:  Deputy High Court Judge Line in Court

Date of Hearing:  15 March 2007

Date of Judgment:  15 March 2007

______________________

J U D G M E N T

______________________

1.This is an appeal against sentences totalling 18 months imprisonment. 

2.The Appellant had been refused permission to enter Hong Kong using his true identity on several occasions in the past.  In early 2003 he obtained, from a middleman, a false Chinese two-way permit and he used this to enter Hong Kong in April 2003.  That was the substance of Charge 1.

3.On 9th January this year he again used the false Chinese two-way permit.  That gave rise to Charges 2 and 3, using it and making a false representation.  He was caught and on his person was found a forged Hong Kong Identity Card along with a forged Mainland Occupational Qualification Certificate. 

4.The sentences the Magistrate passed were, of course, in line with the standard sentencing practice, being sentences after a one-third discount for the plea of 12 months on each charge.  The 2003 matter was a separate use of the false document and the 2007 matters therefore overlap the sentences to produce 18 months.

5.The Appellant appears before me today making no criticism of the sentences but merely asking that I help him because his father has hypertension and his wife has mental problems.  I have no reason to doubt the Appellant when he says that.  He appears a decent man and he tells me, very honestly, that the hypertension had started in 2005 and his wife has had mental problems since the 90s.

6.He knew what was at stake when he came here and broke the law.  Whilst he asks very nicely for a reduction in his sentence, the fact is these are standard sentences and it would be unfair to other people if he were made an exception without there being a good reason for it.  Accordingly, I am bound to dismiss the appeal.

Representations:

Mr Michael Wong, Government Counsel, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Appellant: Zhu, Fangxin (朱房新), in person