HKSAR v. Wong Ho Yee

DCCC 699/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 699 OF 2015

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. 

2.In late evening on 13 July 2015, the police were on duty in the vicinity of Fuk Lok Path, Yuen Long.  At about 7:57 pm, they found the Defendant suspicious.   A body search on her yielded from her underpants one large transparent re-sealable plastic bag containing 62 small transparent re-sealable plastic bags each containing cocaine (later confirmed to be 12.4 grammes of a solid containing 6.08 grammes of cocaine in total).  In her bag were an electronic scale containing traces of powder containing cocaine and cash of HK$7,010.

3.After arrest for trafficking in a dangerous drug and under caution she remained silent. 

4.In a video-recorded interview she said, among others, as follows:

(1) She had purchased the cocaine found on her at HK$15,000 – HK$16,000;

(2) The cocaine in each packet weighed 0.20 – 0.22 gramme;

(3) She had purchased the electronic scale for weighing each packet of the cocaine;

(4) The $7,010 found on her was her monthly salary from working for her father’s company;

(5) She was on the way to an arcade when being intercepted;

(6) She had placed the cocaine inside her underpants when she set off from home.

5.She is now aged 17, educated up to F. 3 level.  After leaving school until arrest, she worked in various beauty parlours.  She had one record for wounding and one for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.  She was put on probation for each. 

6.Before arrest, she worked for her parents in their decoration and engineering company.  She lived with them and an elder sister.  In mitigation, her counsel submits that a large part or half of the 62 packets of the cocaine found on her was for her own consumption.  As to why she had brought all 62 packets out from home when she was arrested by the police, her explanation through her counsel is that she did not want her domestic helper to discover the cocaine in her bedroom.  She shared her bedroom with her elder sister.  She did not have a locked drawer, nor did she buy a locked piggy bank to keep her private belongings such as the cocaine.  She would consume the cocaine outside home.  Given the most private setting, she could well finish up the 31 packet of cocaine within 4 hours.  I indicate that a Newton hearing is to be conducted for such facts to be established for the purpose of sentencing.  However, her counsel informs me that she will not wish to have any Newton hearing and asks me to determine the facts without it. 

7.The Training Centre Report states that she is a drug-dependant, hence not recommended for detention there. 

8.According to the sentencing guidelines laid down in R v Lau Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370, a trafficker shall face 2 – 5 years’ imprisonment for up to 10 grammes of cocaine. 

9.I am satisfied that all 62 packets she brought out from home were for trafficking, aided by the electronic scale.  I take 3 years as the starting point.  I give a one-third discount for her plea of guilty.  There are no other mitigating factors.  The sentence is 2 years.