LO HOI-KWONG v. THE QUEEN

CACC000005/1978

IN THE SUPREME COURT
Criminal Appeal
1978 No. 5

—————–

BETWEEN
LO Hoi-kwong Appellant
and
THE QUEEN Respondent

—————–

Coram: Huggins J.A.

Date of Judgment: 12th January 1978.

—————–

JUDGMENT

—————–

1. The Appellant’s plea in this case really is one for pity. I am sorry about his personal misfortunes, but the reasons that he hasadvanced do not justify my interfering with the sentences. However, there are other considerations which he has not mentioned. Thesentences were sentences of six months’ imprisonment on three charges. Two of those sentences, relating to possession of dangerousdrugs or instruments for injecting dangerous drugs, were concurrent and the third one, for resisting arrest, was consecutive. I needsay nothing about the sentences for possession of the drugs and the instruments because they were perfectly proper. Six months forresisting arrest may be regarded as heavy. In saying that I do not want it to be thought that I shall not at all times endeavourto support the police in their very difficult task, but I have a feeling in the present case that the Appellant was sentenced morefor his past record than for this particular offence. What happened was that when he was arrested the Appellant twisted his bodyround and in so doing threw the police officer off balance, and they both rolled down the stairs. No doubt this was very unpleasantfor the police officer, but it was not an intended consequence. Unfortunately the Appellant has been convicted of resisting arreston three previous occasions and of assaulting a police officer on another occasion. As I say, I suspect that this weighed heavilywith the magistrate. Even having regard to those previous offences I think that a sentence of six months’ imprisonment was too much.The appeal will be allowed to the extent that the sentence on the third charge is reduced from six months to two months consecutive.

12th January 1978.

Representation: