HKSAR v. Chan Cheong Kuk

DCCC 98/2017

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 98 OF 2017

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

2.The particulars are as follows.  On 1 November 2016, she was arrested between Block 22 and 23, Shek Kip Mei Estate in Sham Shui Po, for unlawfully trafficking in 12.87 grammes of a mixture containing 10.63 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

3.At about 6.40 pm that evening, a police officer noticed the defendant looking suspicious and nervous between Block 22 and 23.  She was intercepted.  This is a stop and search case, where the police’s intuition was very accurate.  In the defendant’s backpack the police found a plastic bag containing 52 separate packets of heroin hydrochloride.  In the form they were packaged they were all ready to be sold.

4.The defendant admitted under caution to the police that she had bought all the drugs for her own consumption, but there was no admission of trafficking at that point.

5.Today the defendant has pleaded guilty to trafficking in that amount of heroin.

6.Mr Ng has said all he can say on behalf of the defendant in mitigation.

7.By way of background, the defendant is 41 years old, a mother of three children, who are now in the care of her elderly parents‑in‑law. Her husband is a construction site foreman who obviously has to work long hours.  The children are 17, 9 and 6.  Children that age need their mother at home, but a drug‑addicted mother is really of no use to them.

8.The defendant has a previous conviction for possession of dangerous drugs, when she served a drug addiction treatment centre order.  That sentence was imposed after she was arrested for this offence.  Clearly, when she committed this offence, she was on police bail for possession of dangerous drugs.  Clearly, from the record, when the police arrested her for this offence, there was an outstanding warrant for her arrest.

9.From the record, there is another occasion where she was sentenced to drug addiction treatment centre, this time in August 2013, for possession of dangerous drugs, but that conviction was not recorded.

10.I have a letter of mitigation from the defendant.  She is confident she has rid herself of her addiction.  She knows her children need her and her husband has to work very hard without her at home.  She wants to be a responsible mother, and asks for leniency.  I have taken the contents of the letter into account.

11.I have been told that while she was in drug addiction treatment centre, she helped prevent a suicide.  That is commendable, but does not carry much weight in sentencing in such a serious offence as this.  However, it does prove the defendant is a kind person.

12.I have been told it has been explained to the defendant that there are guidelines for trafficking heroin, and I have taken into account the authority of R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLRD 370.  The Court of Appeal have said there that where up to 10 grammes is trafficked, a 2 to 5 year term of imprisonment would be appropriate, and where between 10 to 50 grammes is trafficked, a 5 to 8 year starting point would be appropriate.

13.Here, with 10.63 grammes of heroin hydrochloride, mathematically speaking, the starting point should be 5 years or slightly over.

14.Defendant, please stand up.  I have taken into account the defendant’s role either as a courier or a drug mule.  There is no evidence the defendant is the mastermind.  However, a drug mule or a courier is still a vital cog in the machinery that is very harmful to society.

15.I also take into account the defendant’s plea, the mitigation put forward, and the fact that you have no similar convictions in the past; in fact, very little past convictions.

16.Therefore, I will take a lesser starting point than a 10.63 grammes case would attract.  I will take a starting point of 4 years and 3 months for this offence.

17.You have pleaded guilty.  You are entitled to a discount of one-third.  After that discount is applied, for this offence, you are sentenced to 2 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.

COURT: Do you understand?

DEFENDANT: Understand.