HKSAR v. NG WAI PING

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No.346
(Criminal)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Stuart-Moore, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The Applicant was convicted in the District Court on 12th June 1997, following a trial before Deputy Judge Wright, on a charge of attempted robbery. He pleaded guilty to an additional charge of remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration. He was sentenced to five years' imprisonment on the first charge and to nine months' imprisonment on the second. Six months of the sentence in respect of the immigration offence was ordered to be served consecutively, making 5 1/2 years in all. The Applicant seeks leave to appeal against his conviction for attempted robbery and to appeal out of time so far as his sentence is concerned. We have already given him leave to apply out of time regarding sentence.

2. In his self-made Grounds of Appeal, he says firstly that the victim, PW1, could not positively identify anyone at the identification parade and made up a story in court about what had really happened. Secondly, he says that PW4, the interpreter at the police station, proved that Officer Chan was telling lies in court when the officer denied giving any inducement to the Applicant. Thirdly, the Applicant says that he was not responsible for his crime and had no knowledge of the things used in the case to commit it. To these grounds, he has added his side of the story once more, at considerable length in court this morning, in furtherance of his claim that he is innocent of this crime. As to sentence, the Applicant says that he is on painkillers for headaches, and one of the main reasons for his mental suffering is that his father is crippled as a result of snake-bite. His father is now alone with no one to take care of him.

3. The Prosecution's case against the Applicant was very straightforward. They alleged that on 30th January 1997, he hailed a taxi in the New Territories at 5 o'clock in the morning when it was still dark. He grabbed the driver around his neck, holding a chopper in the other hand. The Applicant was disarmed by the driver but the Applicant was able to escape. He was picked up later by the police as a suspected illegal immigrant. In an interview he confessed his attempted robbery of the taxi driver.

4. This is not a re-hearing of the evidence in the trial as the Applicant seems to think it is. We are not here to give our own assessment to the evidence which was seen and heard by the trial judge. The complaints which are made by the Applicant in his Grounds of Appeal were clearly understood by the Deputy Judge and taken into account in his Reasons for Verdict. It is apparent that the trial judge found that the Applicant was wholly unconvincing and he rejected his account of matters.

5. We can find no reason to interfere with the verdict that was recorded in the District Court. The sentence was entirely appropriate for the crime and there is no merit whatsoever in this application both as to conviction and sentence.

6. The application is dismissed and, for the reason that there is no merit in the application, we shall order loss of time. The order is that three months of the period you have already served shall not be reckoned as part of the sentence you have to serve.