R. v. Wu Wai Kwong
|
CACC000708/1995 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1995, No.708
------------------- Coram: Power, V.-P., Bokhary, J.A. and Sears, J. in Court Date of Hearing: 7 May 1996 Date of Judgment: 7 May 1996 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ----------------------- Bokhary, J.A.: 1. This applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction of trafficking in dangerous drugs . 2. Initially, he also sought leave to appeal against his sentence of five years' imprisonment. 3. He does not, however, now pursue his application for leave to appeal against sentence. 4. He is in person before us, as he was at the trial. Long before this case commenced this afternoon, therefore, we studied the papers with particular care; and the papers include detailed grounds and submission from him, which grounds and submissions he has added to and expanded upon in the course of his oral submissions. 5. One of the things he asked is that we appoint a lawyer for him. That we declined to do. 6. Another thing which he asked is that we, in some way, take into account the "evidence" of somebody who was not a witness but who has, it seems, written him a letter. That, too, we declined to do. 7. The case against him, which HH Judge Gould found proved beyond reasonable doubt, was that he had on August 17, 1994, at certain premises in Yuen Long, of which premises he was the tenant, unlawfully trafficked in 32.05 gms of a mixture containing 13.85 gms of heroin. 8. In finding that case so proved, the judge accepted the evidence of police officers who said that they found the applicant at that time and in those premises, seated at a table, putting dangerous drugs into a clamped off straw, and surrounded by other drug-dealing paraphernalia including a large quantity of straws. 9. The judge also accepted that the accused had made - and made voluntarily - a confession to the offence. 10. There was evidence from the applicant, who went to the witness-box, denying possession of the drugs and denying the voluntariness of the confession produced against him. 11. The judge totally disbelieved the applicant and felt sure, having regard to all the circumstances, that he was involved in trafficking and not mere self-use. 12. Looking at all of the material and all of the circumstances as they appear, and after considering the applicant's many points, which we do not propose to set out or even summarise, we are satisfied that he was rightly, safely and satisfactorily convicted. 13. Leave to appeal against conviction is refused. 14. The application for leave to appeal against sentence also fails as not being pursued.
Representation: WU Wai-kwong - applicant in person Mr John Reading for the Respondent |