HKSAR v. Ye Furen

HCMA 1008/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1008 OF 2009

(ON APPEAL FROM ESCC 5540 of 2009)

____________

BETWEEN

____________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Andrew Chan in Court

Date of Hearing: 10 June 2010

Date of Judgment: 10 June 2010

Date of Reasons for Judgment: 29 June 2010

_____________________________

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

_____________________________

1.This is an appeal against sentence. The Appellant was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment after he had pleaded guilty to one count of “using a forged identity card”.

2.The facts are simple.  The Appellant (a mainlander) used a forged ID card which he bought in Shenzhen to open a bank account in Hong Kong.  One month later, he returned to the bank and inquired about password for his bank card.  He was asked to produce his forged ID card again.  Feeling suspicious, the bank staff reported the matter to the police.

3.The grounds of appeal can be summarised as follows: that in the absence of any evidence pointing to the use of the forged ID card either to extend his stay or to seek employment in Hong Kong, the Magistrate was wrong to impose a 15 months’ imprisonment term.  Counsel for the Appellant relies on HKSAR v Li Chang Li, HCMA 935/2004.

4.It is correct that in the present case there is no evidence to suggest the Appellant would use the forged ID card for the two abovementioned purposes.  However, there is evidence to the actual use of the forged ID card. The Appellant not only used it on the day of his arrest but also a month ago to open a bank account.  He therefore committed the offence of “obtaining services by deception”.

5.If mere possession of forged ID card merits a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment, the actual use of the forged ID card and the commission of further offence, in my opinion, attract another 3 months’ imprisonment.

6.The appeal against sentence is dismissed accordingly.

Ms Eva Chan, Public Prosecutor of Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Mr Jasper Kwan, assigned by DLA, for the Appellant