HKSAR v LEE POK YIN

DCCC 1074/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1074 OF 2015

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

Summary of facts

2.  The defendant was intercepted at around 12:10am on 4 November 2015 outside St. John Ambulance Sheung Shui Ambulance Station at Tin Ping Road, Sheung Shui after being spotted by Police officers who thought he acted in a suspicious manner.

3.  Upon search, one tissue paper which was concealed in the defendant’s trousers on his abdomen; and one plastic bag containing a total of 23.9 grammes of a solid was found on his person.

4.  The defendant was arrested. Under caution, the defendant admitted that the solid was cocaine that he bought for $15,000 for self-consumption as it was cheaper to buy in bulk. He bought it in an amusement game Centre in Mongkok at around 5pm on 3 November. The cocaine would have been for a few dozen uses.

5.  The defendant was also in possession of one mobile phone and cash of HK$1,053 and RMB5.

6.  The defendant’s reported residence is a public rental housing unit in Tai Po. Nothing suspicious was found upon search of the defendant’s home.

7.  The solid was later examined and confirmed by Government Chemist to contain 17.8 grammes of cocaine.

8.  The street value of the solid as of November 2015 was HKD$25,693.

9.  It is stated in the final paragraph of the summary of facts that the defendant was in possession of the cocaine for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Previous convictions

10.  The defendant has one spent conviction for taking part in an unlawful assembly. This will not be held against the defendant.

Mitigation

11.  Mr Chu on behalf of the defendant submitted that the defendant does not claim that any of the drugs were for his self-consumption any more.

12.  The defendant is 19, single and lives with his father. He grew up in a single parent family. The defendant’s father, grandmother and aunt were in court to support the defendant.

13.  The defendant and his father wrote to the court in mitigation, and I was shown a letter written by the defendant to his father. The contents of the letter shows a young person who is truly remorseful and appreciative of the support that his father is giving him.

14.  Mr Chu submitted that the defendant had cooperated fully with the Police after his arrest, that the defendant committed the offence to earn some quick money since his father had been unable to work as a result of a work injury suffered in 2012.

Sentencing guidelines

15.  It is not disputed that the sentencing tariffs for trafficking in cocaine of 10 to 50g is that  of imprisonment of between 5 to 8 years[1].

Sentence

16.  The maximum sentence for trafficking in dangerous drugs is that of a fine of $5 million and imprisonment for life.

The defendant’s age

17.  The defendant is 19 years old. However, because trafficking in dangerous drugs is an excepted offence under the Criminal Procedure Ordinance[2], s.109A[3] of the same Ordinance does not apply.

18.  In any event, I find that given the serious nature of the offence, the quantity of cocaine involved and the relatively mature age of 19, the only appropriate sentence is that of immediate imprisonment.

19.  Although it was submitted on behalf of the defendant that he was ‘only’ a courier, I find that this is not a mitigating factor. Without the participation of the defendant, the drugs would not be delivered and it is exactly this type of situations that those behind the scene would seek to exploit the young.

20.  This court must send the message that even if they are young, if they choose to be exploited, they have to suffer the full consequences of their actions.

Starting point

21.  Given the narcotic quantity of 17.8g of cocaine, applying the tariff, I adopt a starting point of 66 months’ imprisonment.

Discounts

22.  For the defendant’s clear record, his age and the remorse that I can see from the letters he wrote to his father, I will reduce this sentence by 6 months.

23.  The defendant is granted a full one-third discount for his guilty plea and sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment.