HKSAR v. Nguyen Van Chinh

Case No.CACC 607/1997
Court
Court of Appeal
Date20 Jan 1998
Judge
Case Document
100%

CACC000607/1997

I0N THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No. 607
(Criminal)

BETWEEN
HKSAR Respondent
AND
NGUYEN VAN-CHINH Applicant

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

Coram: Hon Mayo and Stuart Moore, JJ.A.

Date of Hearing: 20 January 1998

Date of Judgment: 20 January 1998

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Mayo, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The Applicant was charged with one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs. Particulars of the offence read that the Applicant on or about 12th March 1997 outside Room 22, Block 40, Pillar Point Vietnamese Refugee Centre, Tuen Mun, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 18.75 grammes of a mixture containing 13.58 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

2. He pleaded not guilty and was tried in the District Court before Deputy Judge Day. He was found guilty and was sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment. He now seeks leave to appeal against the sentence.

3. The main issue in the trial was whether the dangerous drugs which were found in the Applicant's possession were for his own consumption or were for the purpose of trafficking.

4. For the reasons given by the judge, he disbelieved the Applicant's testimony and was satisfied that the prosecution had proved its case. All the Applicant states in his application for leave is that the trial was unfair. Before us he refers to his difficult family circumstances. The starting point adopted by the judge of 5 years' imprisonment was in conformity with the guidelines in R. v. Lau Tak-ming [1990]2 HKLR 370.

5. Although there was no plea of guilty, the judge did, as an act of mercy, give the Applicant a discount of one year as the issue had been confined in the manner described. The sentence imposed was a merciful one. There is no merit whatever in this application and it is dismissed.

6. We order that three months of the time which the Applicant has spent in custody should not count towards his sentence.

(Simon Mayo) (M. Stuart Moore)
Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal

Representation:

Mr Albert Wong, SGC (DPP) for Respondent

Nguyen Van Chinh, Applicant in person