Hksar v Chan Kwok Leung

Cited as:[1998] 1 HKLRD 792
Court:Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:FAMC4/1998
Judgment Date:25 May 1998
FAMC000004/1998 HKSAR v. CHAN KWOK LEUNG

FAMC No. 4 of 1998

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 4 OF 1998 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACC 218 OF 1997)

____________________

Between :

CHAN KWOK LEUNG

Applicant

AND

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

Respondent

____________________

Appeal Committee :

Mr Justice Litton PJ, Mr Justice Ching PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ in Court

Date of Hearing : 25 May 1998

Date of Determination : 25 May 1998

______________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

______________________________

Mr Justice Litton PJ:

1. This is the determination of the Appeal Committee on an application for leave to appeal brought under s32(1) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484.

2. The applicant was convicted on 16 April 1997 after trial in the High Court on one count of robbery and was sentenced to six years' imprisonment. His application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal was heard on 13 November 1997 and was dismissed on the same day. On 10 March 1998 he filed a notice of application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against that judgment. This is well outside the time limit of 28 days imposed by s33(1) of Cap 484. To entertain this application, an extension of time under s33(2) is needed.

3. The conviction arose from a robbery in commercial premises at Kwun Tong on the morning of 25 January 1992. A group of men entered those premises, one armed with what looked like a handgun and another with a knife, forced the occupants into a sample storage room, bound them up with adhesive tape and robbed them of money and other property. The applicant was arrested on 7 March 1992 when he went to the Kwun Tong Pier for a rendezvous and the police found him wearing a watch which had been stolen in the course of the robbery.

4. There were four occupants in the premises at the time of the robbery. One of them, a Miss Yu, identified the applicant as one of the robbers at an identification parade held on 12 March 1992. Miss Yu testified to the effect that on the morning of the robbery she was answering the telephone when she noticed that something was amiss: A man was holding one of her colleagues from behind; the man looked "pretty fierce", took the telephone from her...

To continue reading

Request your trial