|
Wrongly Convicted Database Record
|
Charge: |
Tampering with Motor Vehicle |
Sentence: |
6 weeks |
Years Imprisoned: |
|
Year Crime: |
2014 |
Year Convicted: |
2014 |
Year Cleared: |
2015 |
U.S. State or Country of Crime: |
Hong Kong |
County or Region of Crime: |
Hong Kong |
City of Crime: |
Hong Kong |
Result: |
Judicially Exonerated |
Summary of Case: |
"Law Yat-ting was wrongly convicted in 2014 of tampering with a motor vehicle after he closed the left front passenger door of a van parked in the Tsuen Wan section of Hong Kong on February 21, 2014. The van's owner saw Yat-ting close the open door, and noticed that cell phone on his seat was missing. He chased after Yat-ting and accused him of stealing the cell phone. Yat-ting protested that he only close the open door, and after a police search found he didn't have the phone, he was charged with tampering with a motor vehicle. After his conviction in the Tsuen Wan Magistrates' Court, Yat-ting was sentenced to serve six weeks in jail. Yat-ting appealed, but his conviction and sentence were affirmed by the appeals Court of First Instance on December 17, 2014. Yat-ting submitted an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, which was granted on July 3, 2015, to resolve the issue of whether the mere act of Yat-ting's closing the door of the vehicle could not support a charge of tampering with a motor vehicle. On October 26, 2015 Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal quashed Yat-ting's conviction on the basis his act of closing the vehicle's door did not constitute a crime. The Court stated in its written ruling: "His act of closing the door could simply have been an act of helpfulness towards the vehicle owner. In any event, there is no evidence of any alteration or harm to the door or any other part of the vehicle, or any change in it, as a result of the appellant’s interaction with the vehicle. In the circumstances, therefore, the evidence could not support the offence charged and the appellant’s conviction was wrongful and should be quashed. " The appeals court ordered "that the respondent pay the appellant the sum of HK$10,000 for the costs incurred in the courts below and the sum of HK$4,235 for disbursements incurred by the appellant for the leave application and appeal before this Court."" |
Conviction Caused By: |
|
Innocence Proved By: |
"On October 26, 2015 Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal quashed Yat-ting's conviction on the basis his act of closing the vehicle's door did not constitute a crime." |
Defendant Aided By: |
|
Compensation Awarded: |
|
Was Perpetrator Identified? |
|
Age When Imprisoned: |
|
Age When Released: |
|
Sex: |
Male |
Skin/Ethnicity: |
|
Information Source 1: |
"HKSAR v. Law Yat Ting, FACC3/2015 (The Court of Final Appeal, 10-26-2015) (Quashing conviction)" |
Information Location 1: |
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=101045&currpage=T |
Information Source 2: |
"Top court closes door on case of van `tampering', By Kenneth Lau, The Standard, October 27, 2015" |
Information Location 2: |
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?art_id=162550&con_type=3 |
Information Source 3: |
"Case closed on door-closing case: Hong Kong court rules man jailed for shutting a car door was not tampering with it, By Stuart Lau, South China Morning Post, October 26, 2015" |
Information Location 3: |
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-crime/article/1872561/case-closed-door-closing-case-hong-kong-court-rules-man |
Information Source 4: |
|
Information Location 4: |
|
Information Source 5: |
|
Information Location 5: |
|
Book About Case: |
|
Book Information: |
|
Book About Case (2): |
|
Book Information (2): |
|
Movie About Case: |
|
Comments About Case: |
Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org