HKSAR v. Chan Lok Lam

DCCC 1029/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1029 OF 2016

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to:

- 1^st Charge: Theft concerning a mobile phone of another person found in defendant’s possession;

- 2^nd Charge: Trafficking in a dangerous drug concerning 35.72 grammes of ketamine;

Summary of facts

2.On 18 July 2016 at around 8 pm in the evening, the defendant was seen acting furtively by a team of police officers and the defendant was subsequently intercepted outside No 91 Ma Tau Kok Road, To Kwa Wan, Kowloon.  There and then he was searched and arrested. 

3.A black Samsung mobile phone was found from the defendant’s left front trousers pocket and, under caution, he admitted that he had picked phone up from a playground on Maple Street, Sham Shui Po, the day before.

4.The defendant was later on brought to the Kowloon City Police Station where a total of 15 plastic bags of dangerous drugs containing 35.72 grammes of ketamine was found from his both shoes.  Under caution, the defendant admitted that he was going to give those ketamine to someone else.

5.At the time of the arrest, the defendant had cash more than $8,000 in his possession.  Total estimated value of the ketamine seized in the present case was around HK$14,000.

Mitigation

6.The defendant is 18 years old and is of a clear record in Hong Kong. His parent divorced when he was seven years old and he was taken care of by his elderly grandmother who was assisted by CSSA all along. He worked in hair salons since teenage earning $8,500 per month and would contribute to part of the living expenses of his grandmother. It was mitigated that the defendant was in lack of parental guidance and was badly influenced by his peers.  Due to financial difficulty and greediness, he committed the present offences.

7.There are a number of mitigation letters written by the defendant, his mother, grandmother, classmates and churchmates.  The defendant is regarded as a loving son and grandson as well as a responsible colleague and lovable friend.  The defendant expressed his deep remorse and urged the court to sentence him as lenient as possible so that he can start his life afresh given his young age and good background.

Sentence

8.In respect of the 2^nd Charge, the Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in various dangerous drugs.  For 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine, the sentence ranges from 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment after trial[1].  In view of the sentencing tariff and all the circumstances of the case, particularly his young age and good background, I take a starting point of 4.5 years’ imprisonment.

9.A one-third discount is given for his guilty plea, reducing the sentence further to 3 years’ imprisonment.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction.  I sentence the defendant to 3 years' imprisonment for the 2^nd charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

10.Regarding the count of theft of a mobile phone, I take a starting point of 3 months’ imprisonment and give a full one third discount for his guilty plea.  I order 1 month out of 2 months’ imprisonment to be served consecutively to the 36 months’ imprisonment imposed for the trafficking count, given the totally principle.  The defendant is sentenced to a total of 3 years and 1 month’ imprisonment accordingly.