HKSAR v. Pu Xiao Ying

DCCC 391/2017

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 391 OF 2017

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charges and facts

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to possession of a dangerous drug (1^st Charge) and possession of apparatus fit and intended for inhalation of a dangerous drug (2^nd Charge).

2.On 15/2/2017, the Police executed a search warrant inside a flat in Yau Ma Tei. The Defendant’s younger sister was there.  On a table were found:

(1) 9.06 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 8.64 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride (“Ice”);

(2) 1 glass bottle with a straw containing 26 millimetres of liquid containing traces of Ice;

(3) 65 re-sealable plastic bags.

3.During the search, the Defendant returned.  During investigation, she told the police that the Ice was for her consumption and the glass bottle for her to consume the Ice.  She claimed to be an insurance agent earning $20,000 per month.  She bought the Ice for $2,000 ten days ago.  She would use the re-sealable plastic bags to carry small amounts of the Ice outside the flat to consume. 

4.The estimated street value of the drug seized was near $2,500.

Personal background and mitigation

5.She is aged 47.  She claims to be an insurance agent by profession.  She is divorced and has a daughter, aged 26 living in the Mainland. 

6.The price, as accepted by her on the Summary of Facts, was $2,000.  According to the video-record interview, she stated that she earned $20,000 per month.  In her own letter submitted to the court in another case (DCCC743/16) before today, she claimed to earn $30,000 to $40,000 per month in 2013 to 2014.  Not only is the period not relevant to our case but there is also no proof of such income at all.  She also claimed to be a masseuse.  There is no income proof of any kind either. 

7.She had a trafficking record sentenced in April this year (DCCC743/16).  In that same case were 2 counts of simple possession, 1 count of possession of equipment fit for smoking dangerous drugs, and 1 count of possession of Part 1 poison.   She got 31 months in total.  I am told that those offences were committed in April 2016. 

Sentencing guidelines

8.In HKSAR v Mok Cho-tik [2001] 1 HKC 261, a case of Ice, Stock JA observes that the starting point for mere possession of a quantity of dangerous drugs which a bona fide user will normally have in his possession should be in the range of 12 to 18 months before enhancement due to latent risk. 

Sentencing this Defendant

9.I take a starting point of 12 months for the possession alone.  I find her financial standing dubious in the absence of income proof.  Besides, there were the small packets for her to carry the Ice outside home.  For the latent risk, I increase the starting point by 3 months.  There is a one-third off for her timely plea of guilty.  Her sentence is 10 months for the 1st Charge.

10.I take a starting point of 6 months for the 2nd Charge.  There is a one-third discount for her timely plea of guilty.  Her sentence is 4 months for the 2nd Charge.

11.On totality basis, the sentences shall be concurrent. 

12.The present case has no nexus with her previous case for which she was still serving time.  However, I make a totality adjustment so that only 4 months of the sentence today shall be consecutive to her previous sentence.