R. v. WONG YIK CHUN

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1995, No. 687
(Criminal)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Mayo, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction of being in possession of dangerous drugs. Police Officers gave evidence of keeping premises on 7/F of Shing Tung House in Tung Tau Estate under surveillance. They saw the applicant returning to the premises in the early morning of 7 March 1995. A search was conducted on the applicant's person and the dangerous drugs referred to in the charge were found in a waist wallet worn by him. The dangerous drugs consisted of 132.27 grammes of a mixture containing 22.92 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 10.74 grammes of cannabis.

2. According to the post recorded statement taken by one of the officers the applicant admitted that the items which had been found were dangerous drugs and claimed that they were intended for his own consumption.

3. The admissibility of the statement was contested at the trial before His Honour Judge Surman. The judge was satisfied that the statement was a voluntary statement and admitted it as evidence. The applicant did not go into the witness box.

4. The judge was satisfied that the charge had been proved beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the applicant as charged. In his grounds of appeal the applicant claims that the police "extorted him" and that the witness' statement had discrepancies.

5. Before us the applicant complained the police officer did not caution him and did not write anything in his notebook. As we have said the judge was satisfied that the statement had been made freely and voluntarily and admitted the statement of his as evidence we can see no reason to interfere with the judge's findings of fact and the application is dismissed.