HKSAR v. Cheung Ho Sing

DCCC 921/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 921 OF 2016

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The drug we are concerned here is cocaine, and the narcotic quantity of that drug is 7.77 grammes.

2.The facts are straightforward.  The offence was committed on 23 June 2016.  There was anti-narcotics operation conducted at a flat in Nathan Road in Kowloon.  The defendant was seen to enter the flat with a key.  He had a black plastic bag in his right hand.  He told police at the time he was tenant of the room that he entered. 

3.Search was conducted inside the room, and inside the black plastic bag, four transparent resealable plastic bags, each of those containing 10 smaller transparent plastic bags, were found to contain the dangerous drug.  That was later confirmed to be the 7.77 grammes of cocaine particularised in the charge with a street value of some $13,869.40.  The defendant in fact had on him at the time some over $20,000.

4.Inside the room were found two electronic scales and a large number of empty transparent resealable plastic bags.  Under caution, the defendant admitted he was going to sell the four bags of cocaine to others, and that is something he has instructed his representative today it was the case.

5.There was a further video-recorded interview. The defendant expanded on his earlier admissions.  He said he received the instructions to sell cocaine from a friend.  He picked up the plastic bag with some 50 small packets of cocaine while he was in Mongkok.  He in fact consumed some of them and then packed the remaining cocaine into 40 small packets, using the electronic scales to weigh the cocaine and the empty transparent resealable bags to package them.  He said he had been unemployed but he was not claiming CSSA at the time.  

6.Defendant’s antecedents have been admitted.  Of relevance is the defendant is a 26-year-old man with a clear record.  He was unemployed at the time of his arrest.  He is on his own admission a consumer of both ketamine and cocaine.  He has parents, elderly parents still living, and he has supported them in the past.

7.As far as his mitigation is concerned, the defendant’s -- clearly, it is his previous good character that is a major factor to be considered.  He attributes his involvement in drugs to a failure to listen to good advice.  He says he has a stubborn character, and he has lost contact now with his family.  He has a determination to quit drugs. 

8.It can be seen from the investigation the defendant was co-operative throughout, giving details of his involvement in this drugs trade.  A urine test on admission to Correctional Services Department custody showed that he was positive for cocaine which supports what he said that he is a consumer of cocaine.  He did say -- it was put forward in mitigation to say that the cocaine found on him and in the four transparent resealable bags would be for sale to others.  He had already consumed the cocaine that he was going to consume.

9.Turning to the question of sentences, determining the starting point for sentence, the defendant is trafficking in the drug cocaine here and the guideline sentencing for cocaine is the same guidelines used for heroin.  That can be found in the case of Lau Tak Ming. And the quantity of the drug that the defendant was trafficking in in this case is 7.77 grammes which places it in the guideline sentence range of up to 10 grammes which is a starting point for sentence of between 2 to 5 years’ imprisonment.  The quantity the defendant has here would be towards the upper end of that range. 

10.However, the determination of starting point is not purely a mathematical consideration.  I do bear in mind the fact the defendant has up to that avoided any involvement in criminality before.  It is his first offence, and he has expressed determination to free himself from the drug and to pursue a drug-free life on his leaving Correctional Services Department custody for this matter.  The defendant appears to me to be remorseful and realistic in his approach.  

11.I shall in this case take a starting point for sentence of 45 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is entitled to a one-third discount from that as he has from an early stage indicated a plea of guilty to this matter.  That brings the sentence at this stage down to 30 months’ imprisonment.  There are no other mitigating factors to be considered.  So the sentence will be one of 30 months’ imprisonment.