HKSAR v. CHONG WING HOI

HCMA908 and 909/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NOS.908 AND 909 OF 2000

(On Appeal From KTCC 1347 and 1348 of 2000)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. The appellant was charged with two separate offences, one of possession of a dangerous drug, and one of possession of equipment fit and intended for the smoking of dangerous drug. The second offence took place on 8 June 2000 and the first offence on 16 June 2000. The appellant was convicted on his own plea and sentenced on the first count to eight months' imprisonment and on the second to six months' imprisonment, with four months of the eight months' sentence to be concurrent and four months consecutive with that of the six months' imprisonment, giving a total of 10 months' imprisonment. The appellant now appeals those sentences.

2. The appellant relies upon a letter written to the court as his address in respect of his appeal. Given part of that letter, I held a hearing in chambers, adopting the procedure set out in R. v. Asher Sivan and Others (1988) 10 Cr.App.R.(S) 282. As a consequence of that hearing, the receipt of material placed before me by Miss Ching for the respondent and concessions made by her in respect of that material, a reduction in sentence is appropriate.

3. I have considered further the other matters raised by the appellant in his letter to me, i.e. his desire to attend his son's graduation in Australia, a fall in which he sustained injury while in prison and his grievance that another accused in an almost identical case in Kwun Tong received a lesser sentence. None of these matters have any substance and there is no requirement or necessity on humanitarian grounds to reduce the sentence. There is, however, a need that the sentence be reduced pursuant to the Sivan hearing.

4. I am informed that the appellant entered custody on 16 June 2000 and has been in custody since that date. Giving an effective period served, taking into account the period of one-third for good behaviour - something of a little over six months' imprisonment. It is my view that the matters canvassed in the Sivan hearing are such as to warrant a further reduction in sentence which would affect his immediate release.

5. I, therefore, allow both the appeals to the extent that the sentence be varied to effect his immediate release.