THE QUEEN v. CHAN KWOK LEUNG

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1995, No.114
(Criminal)

__________________

__________________

JUDGMENT

__________________

Ching JA (delivering the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant was convicted on one charge of stealing a motor vehicle on 31 August 1993 for which he was sentenced to imprisonment for 2½ years. He appeals only against the conviction and not against the sentence.

2. The grounds of appeal are that the prosecution produced no material evidence against him, that he had called four alibi witnesses, and that the evidence of the prosecution was manufactured and contrary to the evidence of those alibi witnesses.

3. The judge below correctly directed himself that the onus of proving that the applicant was at the scene of the crime lay upon the prosecution. He found that the relevant witness, PW1, was an unreliable witness so far as times were concerned. However, PW1 gave evidence that he was present with and was an accomplice of the applicant in the commission of the offence. The judge below warned himself of the dangers of relying on the evidence of an accomplice without corroboration and, having done so, nevertheless, accepted his evidence nd rejected that of the alibi witnesses.

4. This was wholly a matter of fact within the province of the trial judge and nothing has been said which would entitle us to interfere. That effectively answers all the complaints in the grounds of appeal, and the application must be dismissed.