HKSAR v. Chow Wing Yan

DCCC 868/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 868 OF 2016

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.Chow Wing Yan you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in 126 grammes of a powder containing 57.4 grammes of ketamine, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance[1].

2.Full particulars of the offence are set out in the facts admitted by you today.  In summary around 8:57 p.m. on 28 July last year the police intercepted you outside the ticket office of “Cinema City” on Argyle Street in Mongkok.  The police searched your bag and found 26 transparent re-sealable plastic bags containing the ketamine.  The police also found $5,890 and a mobile phone.  The estimated street value of the ketamine was around $29,988. 

3.Under caution and in a subsequent video interview you admitted delivering the drugs for a person called “Ah Lung” in return for a reward of $700; you had delivered and sold drugs for Ah Lung twice; and that the money found on you was the proceeds from selling drugs.

Mitigation

4.In passing sentence, I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Fung together with the letters of mitigation written by your father, your teachers and your school social worker.  The letters reveal that you are a well behaved and quiet girl at school and although you needed to repeat Form 2, you have received merits and awards at school.

5.Your teacher was impressed by your positive attitude in not giving up on yourself and promising to work hard in the future.  You have also written to the court saying you wish to go back to school. 

6.I take into account that you are only 17, 16 at the time of the offence, and have a clear record.  Section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance[2], provides no court shall sentence a person of or over 16 and under 21 years of age to imprisonment unless the court is of the opinion that no other method of dealing with such person is appropriate.  Whilst this provision does not apply to trafficking in a dangerous drug, which is an excepted offence, a court must exercise great care before committing a young offender to prison. 

7.In Secretary for Justice v Chau Tsz Tim the Court of Appeal restated that only in very rare cases where there are exceptional circumstances will a training centre order be appropriate for trafficking in substantial quantities of drugs[3]. 

8.Mr Fung informs the court that you accept a substantial prison sentence will be imposed and do not ask the court to call for reports before passing sentence. After very careful consideration I am satisfied this is not one of those very rare cases where a training centre order may be appropriate. Notwithstanding your young age and clear record, I am satisfied I can proceed to sentence today without calling for any reports. 

9.In Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Chengthe Court of Appeal laid down guidelines for trafficking in ketamine[4]. Where the narcotic content is between 50 and 300 grammes sentence after trial falls within the range of 6-9 years imprisonment. 

10.On a purely mathematical approach a starting point of just over 6 years would be appropriate for trafficking in 57.40 grammes of ketamine.  Taking into account your age and clear record, I am satisfied a starting point of 6 years imprisonment is appropriate. 

11.Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.