R. v. HOANG TU ANH

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 100 OF 1995

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is an appeal against sentence passed by Mr. Wright in Tuen Mun, for possession of single straw containing 0.11 grammes of narcotic. He was sentenced to a period of 12 months imprisonment and a suspended sentence was activated. In his reasons for sentence the magistrate said: "In sentencing the Appellant I had due regard to the fact that he had six previous convictions of which two were drug related, that he committed this offence only some 3½ months after being given a suspended sentence for an identical offence ..."

2. This, in my judgment, is a wrong approach, persons must be sentenced for the offence for which they are before the court and not their past record. Further, the suspended sentence would be activated which would have to be consecutive and so the fact that his offence was committed 3½ months later does not justify this being an aggravating factor. The sentence is reduced to 6 months, the 6 months suspended is activated and the total is thereafter 12 months imprisonment.