Read the full judgment text of CACC 000277/2007 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 17 October 2008 before Stuart-Moore VP, Stock JA and Wright J.
Criminal law – money laundering – dealing with property knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe it represents proceeds of an indictable offence – s.25(1) and (3) of the Organised and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455 – s.25(1) and (3) of the Drug Trafficking (Recovery of Proceeds) Ordinance, Cap 405 – ss.159A and 159C of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200 – conspiracy – defendant remitted US$140,000 in six transactions to bank account in Fiji used by company renting warehouse where methylamphetamine was manufactured – $750,000 cash found in defendant's wardrobe – defendant had not filed tax returns since 2000 – 'reasonable grounds to believe' involves both objective and subjective elements – whether funds were sent to the place of manufacture rather than received from it raised question whether they facilitated drug manufacture rather than represented proceeds of trafficking – insufficient evidence defendant knew of drug activities in Fiji to support conviction on Charge 1 – conviction on Charge 1 set aside and conviction on alternative Charge 2 substituted – sentencing – starting point of 24 months manifestly inadequate for settled ongoing course of conduct involving substantial sums – 3 years appropriate starting point after trial – discount for 'good character' wrong in principle where no evidence of positive good character – delay in international investigation not exceptional circumstance justifying suspension – sentence of 18 months suspended for 3 years set aside and 2 years imprisonment imposed in its stead – fresh evidence admitted under s.81B(3) and 83V of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap 221.
Legal issues: Sufficiency of evidence for conviction on Charge 1 (drug trafficking proceeds) · Sufficiency of evidence for conviction on Charge 2 (proceeds of indictable offence) · Adequacy of sentencing starting point · Discount for good character · Delay as exceptional circumstance for sentence suspension
Outcome: Appeal against conviction allowed in part: conviction on Charge 1 (drug trafficking proceeds) set aside and substituted with conviction on Charge 2 (proceeds of indictable offence). Application for review of sentence allowed: original sentence of 18 months' imprisonment suspended for 3 years set aside and replaced with 2 years' imprisonment.
Cited by 13 cases