Read the full judgment text of CAAR 000015/1990 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 7 May 1991 before Silke VP, Macdougall JA, Bewley J.
Criminal law – dangerous drugs – methamphetamine hydrochloride ('ICE') – possession for purpose of unlawful trafficking – sentencing guidelines – Court of Appeal Review under s.81A Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221) – respondent and wife found with 5,941 grammes of ICE hidden in wardrobe of flat – plea of guilty – 7 years' imprisonment imposed by trial judge – Attorney General sought review as manifestly inadequate and to obtain guidelines for new drug – ICE is synthetic crystalline methamphetamine made from ephedrine, highly addictive, more deleterious than heroin in some respects, with 10–15 'hits' per gramme and reuse capability – Court held it is better to eradicate drug habit before it takes hold (per Cons JA in Leung Pang Chiu) – ICE placed at same level as, or slightly above, heroin on hard drug sliding scale – Chan Chi Ming and Lau Tak Ming heroin tariffs difficult to apply because ICE is pure at all times – adapting Lau Tak Ming with allowance for greater potency, Court laid down quantity-based post-trial tariff scale: up to 12g – 3 to 7 years; 10–70g – 7 to 10 years; 70–300g – 10 to 14 years; 300–600g – 14 to 18 years; over 600g – 18 years and upwards, subject to allowances for plea, police assistance, cooperation, clear record, and personal factors – on whether new guidelines should apply retrospectively to disadvantage respondent, Court followed Cheng Yeung and held they should not – although sentence was manifestly inadequate in light of fuller information now available, no order was made altering the 7-year sentence (Chan Tak Ming considered) – application dismissed but guidelines established for future cases – Court reserved for future argument the principles applicable to discount upon review.
Legal issues: Sentencing guidelines for trafficking in methamphetamine hydrochloride (ICE) · Application of new sentencing guidelines to the respondent
Outcome: Application for review dismissed; no order made altering the respondent's 7-year sentence, although sentencing guidelines for ICE were laid down for future cases.
Cited by 14 cases