Lee Chun Tat v Hksar

CourtCourt of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgment Date14 Dec 2006
Judgement NumberFAMC52/2006
SubjectMiscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)
FAMC000052/2006 LEE CHUN TAT v. HKSAR

FAMC No. 52 of 2006

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 52 OF 2006 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CACC NO. 271 OF 2005)

_____________________

Between:

  LEE CHUN TAT Applicant
  - and -  
  HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION  Respondent

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ and Mr Justice Chan PJ

Date of Hearing: 14 December 2006

Date of Determination: 14 December 2006

______________________

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

______________________

Chief Justice Li:

1. On 31 May 2005, the applicant was convicted after trial in the District Court (Judge Sweeney) of the offence of possession of a dangerous drug for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. The offence had been committed in February 1985. But the applicant had absconded whilst on bail and was extradited from the USA in December 2004.

2. The admitted facts were as follows:

“On 23 February 1985, PW1-4 were patrolling in Wanchai area in 2 groups where PW1-2 spotted a male (later known to be the Defendant), who was walking towards them, suddenly turned round and fled. PW1 and PW2 gave chase and during the course, they saw the Defendant threw something underneath his jacket onto the pavement and continued to flee. The shouting and yelling alerted PW3-4 and they guarded the packets disposed by the Defendant and it was revealed to be 10 packets of suspected dangerous drugs. On the other hand, whilst PW1-2 [were] chasing the Defendant, an off-duty police officer (PW5), who happened to be in the vicinity, was also alerted, and they eventually intercepted the Defendant and he was arrested. Under caution, the Defendant remained silent.”

The dangerous drugs contained in the ten packets, consisted of a mixture weighing 88.96 grammes containing 17.61 grammes of salts of esters of morphine. Based on the average consumption of a heroin addict set out in the unreported decision in The Queen v Cheung Ping-chiu CACC 162/1993, the quantity of drugs in the present case was equivalent to about 25 days supply.

3. At trial, the applicant did not give evidence. He offered to plead guilty to possession of the dangerous drugs but denied possession for the purpose of trafficking.

4. On 6 September 2006, the Court of Appeal by majority (Stuart-Moore...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT