Cheng Howe Ming

Cheng Howe Ming is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2011. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and sentencing. Their track record shows a 88.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 13% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated expertise across 33 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and criminal procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	8 cases	15% of total caseload	Highly Specialized91% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	6 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Murder	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice8% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Culpable Homicide	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Domestic Violence	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice26% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Offences	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Theft	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Death	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sudden fight	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Review	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Psychiatry	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Falsification of Documents	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mentally disordered offenders	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mitigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Abduction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Private Defence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Asylum	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice1% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Abuse and Neglect	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Support	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Drug Crimes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice1% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Outrage of Modesty	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sex Crimes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Cheng Howe Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Cheng Howe Ming has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Deputy Public Prosecutors	5 cases	63% of cases	PP v Aguilar Guen Garlejo: Culpable Homicide, Mental Disorder, and Sentencing(May 2006) Mohd Halmi v PP: Trafficking in Controlled Drugs & Presumptions under Misuse of Drugs Act(Dec 2005) Public Prosecutor v Vijayakumar: Murder, Private Defence & Penal Code Exceptions(Nov 2005)
Deputy Public Prosecutor	2 cases	25% of cases	Wan Kamil v PP: Murder Conviction Upheld for Taxi Driver Killing; Common Intention & Duress Examined(Mar 2002) Balasubramanian Palaniappa Vaiyapuri v PP: Outraging Modesty on Flight SQ 973(Jan 2002)
Attorney-General’s Chambers	1 cases	13% of cases	Public Prosecutor v AFR: Culpable Homicide and Child Abuse Sentencing(May 2011)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Cheng Howe Ming's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.4
Complex Cases: 1 (13%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	13%
Won	72.4 parties avg	2.4	88%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2004	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Cheng Howe Ming's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Partial	1(13%)	13%
Won	7(88%)	88%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Public Prosecutor v AFR: Culpable Homicide and Child Abuse Sentencing 26 May 2011 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	26 May 2011	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Prosecution's appeal was allowed, and the respondent's sentence was increased.
2	PP v Aguilar Guen Garlejo: Culpable Homicide, Mental Disorder, and Sentencing 28 May 2006 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Partial	28 May 2006	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): PartialThe accused was found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
3	Mohd Halmi v PP: Trafficking in Controlled Drugs & Presumptions under Misuse of Drugs Act 08 Dec 2005 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	08 Dec 2005	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe appeals of both appellants were dismissed, upholding the original conviction.
4	Public Prosecutor v Vijayakumar: Murder, Private Defence & Penal Code Exceptions 29 Nov 2005 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	29 Nov 2005	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionAccused was convicted of murder.
5	Public Prosecutor v Teo Chee Seng: Culpable Homicide Sentencing Appeal for Infant's Death by Medicated Oil 11 May 2005 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	11 May 2005	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal allowedThe Public Prosecutor's appeal against the sentence was allowed.
6	Public Prosecutor v Selvaraju: Kidnapping, Attempted Murder, Mischief by Fire, Voluntarily Causing Hurt 25 Jul 2004 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	25 Jul 2004	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionAccused was convicted on all four charges.
7	Wan Kamil v PP: Murder Conviction Upheld for Taxi Driver Killing; Common Intention & Duress Examined 06 Mar 2002 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	06 Mar 2002	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe appeals of the second and third appellants were dismissed, upholding the original conviction.
8	Balasubramanian Palaniappa Vaiyapuri v PP: Outraging Modesty on Flight SQ 973 22 Jan 2002 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	22 Jan 2002	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): WonAppeal and petition dismissed; sentence enhanced.