HKSAR v. Song Min and Another
|
HCMA 971/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 971 OF 2008 (ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 5852/2008) ----------------------
---------------------- Before: Deputy High Court Judge Line in Court Date of Hearing: 19 March 2009 Date of Judgment: 19 March 2009 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1.This is an appeal against sentence. 2.There are two appellants. Their cases are identical save for the fact that the 1st Appellant has some previous convictions. 3.Each pleaded guilty in the Magistracy to three charges: one of unlawfully remaining; the 2nd charge in each case was the possession of a forged Hong Kong identity card; and the 3rd charge was the possession of a forged Chinese two-way permit. 4.They ended up with sentences of 25 months. Those sentences were clearly wrong. 5.It is a very simple case of illegal immigrants being caught here. That attracts a starting point of 15 months, we all know that. 6.They had been caught, living in a guesthouse, and the evidence showed, based on their admissions, that they had been living there, in comfortable circumstances, shall I put it like that, for some six months. That was worth an enhancement. 7.So in the case of each of them, I would, for the unlawful remaining, move the sentences to 18 months, and in addition, in the case of the 1st Appellant, because his previous convictions were for related offences of possession of forged travel documents shortly before these matters arose, I would enhance by another three months. 8.So in the case of the 1st Appellant, I have reduced his sentence of 25 months down to 21 months in total. 9.As regards the sentences for possession of the forged Hong Kong identity cards, there will be sentences in the usual way, following So Man King, of 15 months each; and as regards the forged two-way Hong Kong permits, the sentences will be concurrent; and I shall impose 12 months in each case. 10.So those are the new sentences, and the result is that the appeals are allowed to the extent I have indicated: 21 months total for the 1st Appellant; 18 months total for the 2nd Appellant.
Mr Graham D Goodman, Senior Public Prosecutor of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent Mr Andy Cheng Lim-chi, instructed by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Appellants |