HKSAR v. Satwinder Singh

DCCC 809/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 809 OF 2016

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

Charge

1.The defendant was facing one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.

2.The particulars of the charge are: the defendant, on the 9^th day of June, 2016, at staircase No 6, 2^nd Floor, Block C, Chungking Mansions, No 40 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 13.3 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 12.9 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

3.The defendant admitted that he possessed the drugs, but he said that the drugs were for his own use, they were not for trafficking.

4.At the end of the trial, having considered all factors, this court believed in him and accordingly convicted him of the lesser charge of simple possession, and acquitted him of trafficking.

Fact

5.As a matter of fact, soon after he purchased the drugs from an alley in Chung King Mansion, he was stopped and searched in the same building by the police.  The drugs were thereby found.

Mitigation

6.The defendant is 25 years old.  He is single.  He came from India to Hong Kong in 2013 and since has been a “torture claimant”.  He was jobless at the time of the offence but he relied financially on the remittance from his father in India.

7.He has clear criminal record.

Latent risk of dissemination

8.The defendant is a hardened drug abuser, he could finish the 13 grammes of ICE seized within 2 weeks.

9.With his father stable remittance and the fact that the defendant has a clear record, his need/chance/propensity to sell any surplus drugs to other users is minimal.  There should not be any sentence enhancement for this minimal risk.

10.As the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre report does not recommend his admission, the defendant shall be sentenced to prison.

Authorities

11.In Mok Cho Tik [2001] 1 HKC, the drug possessed was almost 16 grammes of solid containing 15 grammes of Ice.  The defendant there has one previous possession conviction.  The starting point was adjusted on appeal to 18 months’ imprisonment.

12.In Wan Sheung Sum CACC 438/1999, the drugs possessed were almost 48 grammes of mixture containing about 34 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.  The defendant had four possession convictions.  The starting point adopted on appeal was 16 months’ imprisonment.

13.The total quantity of drugs in this case is smaller than the above two authorities, a 15 months’ starting point is therefore adopted.  Giving the defendant 1/3 discount, this court sentence him to 10 months’ imprisonment.