R. v. LU XIAO MING

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1994, No. 539
(Criminal)

____________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1. On May 1 last year, this applicant, a man in his late 30's, arrived in Hong Kong by air. He cleared immigration. At the customs counter, his suitcase was found to contain a briefcase. In a secret compartment of the briefcase were two plastic bags containing almost three kilos of dangerous drugs, cocaine hydrochloride, with a retail value of over $5 million.

2. The applicant was charged with trafficking in those drugs. He was tried in the High Court in October last year. He said that he did not know that the drugs were in his briefcase.

3. The jury convicted.

4. Plainly, the case was a simple one. On the evidence, a properly directed jury was entitled to take a view that the only reasonable inference was that the applicant knew of the drugs in his briefcase. And once the jury took that view, the conclusion that the applicant was trafficking in those drugs was inescapable.

5. It became our duty, therefore, to study the summing-up to see if it contained any misdirection or non-direction. We have studied the summing-up. And we have found neither misdirection nor non-direction.

6. As far as the application for leave to appeal against conviction is concerned, it is dismissed.

7. Turning to sentence, the applicant was sentenced to 22 years' imprisonment. For this quantity of drugs, that was a proper sentence. And the application for leave to appeal against sentence is also dismissed.