HKSAR v. YU KIN CHIU

HCMA 869/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 869 OF 1999

(On Appeal from SKCC 1542 of 1999)

_______________

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1. The Appellant appeals against his conviction on one charge of Soliciting for an Immoral Purpose and two charges of Living on the Earnings of Prostitution of Others. He has also today applied to appeal against his sentence which was 1 month on the soliciting charge and 3 months on each of the living on the earnings charges; the sentences being concurrent. Although the Appellant did not notify his intention to appeal against sentence, I will hear the appeal against sentence together with the appeal against his conviction.

2. The Appellant was found guilty after trial of the offences, in particular, he gave a statement to the police (the provenance of which was tested by voir dire) stating how he had introduced prostitutes to an undercover police officer for a fee. The Appellant actually admitted in the Record of Interview that the $200.00 he had received was an introduction fee.

3. Apart from the standard general grounds relied on by the Appellant his main ground of appeal is that it was not possible for this $200.00 to be an introduction fee. He said that there was no link established between the witnesses Chan and Ho to show that this payment was an introduction fee and he said the Magistrate took what were separate incidents and fitted it to a theory.

4. I have examined the Magistrate's Statement of Findings and I am satisfied that he was careful in his consideration of the evidence; that he took particular account of the evidence on the special issue, which he dealt with by way of the alternative procedure, and clearly he accepted the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and rejected that of the Appellant.

5. I can see nothing in the Statement of Findings and have heard nothing today which indicates that the Magistrate was in any way at fault in dealing with this case. The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

6. In respect of the appeal against sentence, the Appellant submitted that very often a suspended sentence is given for these offences and he said that whilst he has been on bail pending appeal, he has abided by the bail conditions and he urged on the court the fact that he missed his family. I have no doubt that he does miss his family, but I am also of the view that the Magistrate's sentences were correct and there was no ground on which the Magistrate could properly suspend them.

7. The appeal against sentences is dismissed and the Appellant will serve those sentences with immediate effect.