Yau Kam-cheung v. The Queen

Case No.CACC 134/1977

Court

Court of Appeal

Date17 Feb 1977

Judge—

Case Document

100%

CACC000134/1977

IN THE SUPREME COURT

	Criminal Appeal
	1977 No.134

-----------------

BETWEEN
	YAU Kam-cheung	Appellant
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

-----------------

Coram: Morley-John, J.

Date of Judgment: 17th February, 1977.

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to being a member of an unlawful society contrary to section 20(1) of the Societies Ordinance, Cap. 151. He was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment. He now appeals against this sentence on the grounds that such sentence is too severe.

2. Twelve months' imprisonment in the case of a first conviction for this offence is the maximum sentence of imprisonment provided for by law. From the facts of the case it would appear that the appellant was a member of a triad society and if he had been charged with being a member of a triad society contrary to section 20(2) of the Societies Ordinance then that subsection provides a maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in the case of first conviction. The learned magistrate in his statement of findings stated the facts admitted by the appellant revealed him to be a potentially dangerous member of the Wo Shing Wo Triad Society. However the appellant was not charged with being a member of the triad society. The learned magistrate also stated that in his view there was some ground for the police to have preferred a charge of blackmail against the appellant. But the fact remains that the police did not. The appellant was merely charged with being a member of an unlawful society. Again the learned magistrate considered the appellant to be a rascal despite his frankness before the court and his cooperative behaviour after his arrest. Counsel for the Crown informed me that he did not know on what grounds the learned magistrate came to this consideration and expressed surprise at the severity of the sentence.

3. The appellant is twenty-two years of age and has a clear record. The appeal is allowed to the extent that in place of the sentence of twelve months' imprisonment imposed by the learned magistrate there be substituted therefor a sentence of three months' imprisonment.

(M. Morley-John, J.)

Representation:

Appellant in person.

B.D. Amey, Crown Counsel, for Crown/Respondent.