HKSAR v. LAM KWOK KEUNG

1997, NO. MA 644

IN THE HIGH COURT OF

THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL

__________________

__________________

__________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

1. The appellant appeals the decision of Mr M.N. Holmes, magistrate, to convict him for being in possession of a quantity of heroin whose narcotic content was .04 grammes in weight.

2. The prosecution case was that two patrolling police officers apprehended the appellant who was, in their eyes, acting furtively. They stopped and searched him and found the substance which forensic analysis identified as the drugs the subject of the charge.

3. The defence case put forward in cross-examination was that the appellant was framed, that the drugs were planted, but this was denied.

4. The appellant elected not to give evidence. He called two witnesses but they said nothing that was relevant.

5. The learned magistrate, on an evaluation of all the evidence, found the defendant guilty.

6. His sole ground of appeal was that there was no evidence or sufficient evidence upon which to found a conviction. Before me, he has said he was dissatisfied with the approach of the learned magistrate as to what he was told by the police officers.

7. The magistrate heard and saw the witnesses. He was able to consider and establish their credibility. The process by which he arrived at his decision to convict was without flaw.

8. The appeal is dismissed.