HKSAR v. Tsoi Sin Yee
Read the full judgment text of CACC 27/2014 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 18 November 2014 before Lunn VP, Poon JA, D. Pang JA.
Criminal law – dangerous drugs – trafficking in methamphetamine hydrochloride – section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134 – plea of guilty – sentence of 13 years and 9 months' imprisonment – application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed – subsequent application for certification that a point of law of great and general importance is involved – whether grounds raised are directly relevant to the issue previously determined – duty of counsel to pursue relevant grounds – applicant appearing in person – application dismissed.
Legal issues: Whether a point of law of great and general importance is involved in the Court's refusal of leave to appeal against sentence
Outcome: Application for certification of a point of law of great and general importance dismissed.
Cited by 17 cases
|
CACC 27/2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2014 (ON APPEAL FROM HCCC NO. 326 OF 2013) ____________ BETWEEN
____________
____________
____________ Hon Lunn VP (giving the Decision of the Court) : 1.On 15 July 2014 this Court dismissed the applicant’s application for leave to appeal against a sentence of 13 years and 9 months’ imprisonment imposed on her by E. Toh J on 22 January 2014, following her plea of guilty to a single count of unlawfully trafficking in 1.73 kg of methamphetamine hydrochloride on 1 February 2013, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134. 2.By a notice of motion dated 28 July 2014 the applicant invites this Court to certify that a point of law of great and general importance is involved in that judgment. In an affirmation affirmed on the same day in support of the application, the applicant asserts the following grounds :
3.As is apparent from our judgment, the issue arising in the application for leave to appeal against sentence was whether or not the judge had ordered the applicant an appropriate discount of sentence having regard to the assistance that she had given to the authorities, without having been required to give evidence. 4.In her oral submissions to the Court the applicant complained that she had told her counsel that the police had been most unfair to her but he did not say anything about it at the hearing before this Court. He merely informed her that her application was against sentence only. 5.None of the grounds advanced by the applicant in this application are directly relevant to the issue. We are satisfied that no point of law of great and general importance is involved in our judgment. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
Mr Andrew Li, SPP of the Department of Justice, for the respondent Applicant appeared in person |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACC 27/2014