HKSAR v. Poon Wai Hung

HCCC 104/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 104 OF 2015

-----------------

------------------

---------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

---------------------------------

COURT: The defendant pleads guilty to one count of trafficking in 210 grammes of ketamine. At about half past 6 pm on 10 April 2014, the defendant was seen walking out from an alley in the vicinity of Tai Pei Square and Chuen Lung Street. He was carrying a paper bag. The police stopped him outside Shun Hing Building. They found a bag of ketamine inside the paper bag. The defendant admitted that he bought the ketamine from a person for the purpose of trafficking.

The police also found about $14,000 and two mobile phones on him. Later, the police searched his home and found a bundle of plastic bags and an electronic scale inside his bedroom. The defendant admitted that these items were for packaging ketamine for sale.

The police estimated that the retail value of the ketamine in this case was about $28,000.

The defendant is 36 years old. He has two previous convictions. He was last sentenced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment for trafficking in a dangerous drug in 2009.

He received education up to Form 3. Before his arrest, he was a part-time construction site worker and a part-time cook, earning about $17,000 a month. He is divorced, with a six-year-old daughter under the care of his ex-wife. He committed this offence because of financial reasons. He was no longer an addict since 2009.

In his letter to this court, the defendant pleads for leniency. His family life was shattered because of his criminal offences. He wishes to take care of his parents and reunite with his wife and daughter after discharge from prison.

The sentence for trafficking 210 grammes of ketamine according to S for J v Hii Siew Cheng, should be 7 years and 11 months’ imprisonment. Mr Cheung, counsel for the defendant, invites this court to consider additional leniency for the defendant’s early plea, which is in sharp contrast to the current delaying trend. This shows that the defendant is in genuine remorse.

While I agree that this attitude should be encouraged, however, the one-third discount on the plea of guilty has adequately addressed the situation.

Having considered the circumstances of this case, I take a starting point of 7 years and 11 months’ imprisonment. I deduct 2 years and 8 months for his plea. I sentence the defendant to 5 years and 3 months’ imprisonment for this count.