刑事檢控科各律師/高級律政 - Department of Justice

8
B. CRIMINAL APPEALS/
AGAINST SENTENCE
/ CA 195/2000
Stuart-Moore VP
Leong &
Wong JJA
(4.8.2000)
*Louisa Lai
#I/P
HOANG
Thi Thu Huyen
Offence committed whilst accused on bail for earlier offence/
Totality not relevant to sentencing exercise/Consecutive
sentence appropriate
- -
On 2 May 2000, the Applicant pleaded guilty to a charge of
trafficking in a mixture containing 47.24 grammes of heroin
hydrochloride. She was sentenced on 16 May 2000 to 4 years’
imprisonment.
When he sentenced the Applicant, the judge observed:
Defence counsel also urges me to take into account
the totality principle, insofar as the defendant has
just commenced a sentence of imprisonment for
theft. For the present offence I select from the
guidelines a starting point of 7 years and discount
that by one-third for the plea of guilty, leading to a
result of 4 years and 8 months. I discount that by a
further 8 months in accordance with the totality
principle, and in the result I impose 4 years’
imprisonment, that sentence to be consecutive to the
sentence at present being served.
On appeal, it was submitted that the sentence was too heavy and
that leniency ought to be shown to her because her mother was
seriously ill in Vietnam.
Held :
The offence was committed whilst the Applicant was on bail for a
theft offence which had been committed on 13 September 1999. It
was very difficult to see why totality played any part at all in the
sentencing exercise undertaken by the judge. The present offence was
entirely separate to the other matter and was, in any event, committed
whilst the Applicant was on bail. In such circumstances it was almost
inevitable that the sentence for this offence should have been ordered to
run consecutively. If the overall effect produced a sentence which was
considered to be too long then a part of the sentence could have been
ordered to run concurrently. The Applicant was remarkably fortunate
to have had the benefit of a somewhat unusual approach taken by the
judge.