HKSAR v. Wong Sut Kit

DCCC 142/2017

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 142 OF 2017

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.Wong Sut Kit you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in 10.24 grammes of a solid containing 8.77 grammes of cocaine, 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 on 22 November last year you were intercepted at the Customs Departure Hall of the Macau Ferry Terminal.  An Ion-scan test of your personal belongings showed a positive result for cocaine.  You were then searched and inside the inner layer of the back of your jacket customs officers found a total of 55 packets containing the cocaine.

Mitigation

3.In passing sentence, I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Tam, in particular that you were brought up by your mother, your father having passed away in 2008.  I have considered   your mitigation letter together with letters from your mother and pastors from the Hong Kong Tsz Kwong Bethel Church, all of whom are prepared to assist you in your rehabilitation. 

4.I take into account your young age, only 21 and that you have no previous convictions for drug offences.  Mr Tam tells the court that you committed the offence because you were unemployed.

5.Mr Tam submitted that you have the habit of taking cocaine and that part of the cocaine was for your own consumption.  You did not however tell the police any of the cocaine was for your own use.  On the contrary, on arrest you told the police that you did not even know you were carrying drugs and in the antecedent statement said you were not a drug addict. 

6.Apart from your assertion that you have the habit of taking cocaine no other evidence has been placed before the court to show you have the habit of taking cocaine, including how much cocaine you take and how being unemployed you were able to afford the cocaine. 

7.As indicated in court without further evidence I do not accept the mere assertion that part of the cocaine was for your own consumption.  Mr Tam having taken your further instructions informs the court that you withdraw the mitigation that part of the cocaine was for your own consumption.  I proceed on the basis the cocaine was all for trafficking.  

Starting point/sentence

8.The courts have equated for sentencing purposes cocaine with heroin[2].  In R v Lau Tak Ming[3]the Court of Appeal laid down guidelines for trafficking in heroin.  The court said that the sentence upon conviction after trial where the quantity of narcotic is up to 10 grammes is between 2 and 5 years’ imprisonment.    

9.Mr Tam submits a starting point of less than 4 years is appropriate[4].  I disagree.  I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial for 8.77 grammes of cocaine, based on quantity alone, is 4 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.  By reason of your exporting the drugs to Macau the starting point is enhanced by 3 months to 4 years and 9 months[5].

10.Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 3 years and 2 months’ imprisonment.