HKSAR v. Hui Chun Hung

DCCC 32/2017

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 32 OF 2017

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge, namely, trafficking in 19.3 grammes of cocaine.

Facts

2.The facts to which the defendant admitted show that at 10.25 pm on 14 November 2016, the defendant was seen acting furtively outside Mei Chi House, Mei Tin Estate, Shatin.  He was stopped and searched.  A plastic bag containing 24 grammes of a solid containing 19.3 grammes of cocaine (E1) was found in the left pocket of the defendant’s shorts.

3.Under caution, he said that he was delivering the dangerous drugs to earn quick money to pay for his family expenses and to repay his credit card debt.

4.In a subsequent video-recorded interview, he admitted, inter alia, that E1 found on him was cocaine.  He met an unknown male at about 7 pm or 8 pm at Whampoa Garden, Hunghom.  The male asked whether he would like to earn quick money.  The male offered him a job to deliver E1 to Mei Tin Estate by taxi for a reward of $400.  He agreed to take the job.  The male then gave E1 to him. He had not yet received the reward.

5.The street value of E1 was estimated to be HK$34,488. 

6.At all material times, the defendant was in possession of E1 for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Previous Criminal Conviction

7.The defendant has one criminal conviction of dealing with goods to which dutiable commodities applies, for which he was fined $1,500 in May 2008.

Antecedent

8.The content of the antecedent statement was not in dispute.

Mitigation

9.The defendant is represented by Mr Lam.  He submitted that the defendant is aged 40, married with a wife aged 38.  They both have a son aged 8 and a daughter aged 6.  The defendant was a decoration worker earning 7,000 to 15,000 a month.  Prior to the present offence, he was unemployed for some time and is in debt of $60,000.  The defendant was the sole breadwinner of the family.  He has to take care of his aged parents.  His father is not in good health.

10.Mr Lam said that the sentencing guideline for trafficking between 10 grammes and 50 grammes of cocaine is between 5 and 8 years.  He also said that there is no other mitigating factor except the defendant’s guilty plea.

Reasons for Sentence

11.I have carefully considered everything said on behalf of the defendant by Mr Lam and also the mitigating letters put forward.  In summary, the letters described that the defendant was a caring husband and a good father. 

12.The charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug is a very serious offence.  The Court of Appeal in R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 and in HKSAR v Abdullah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437 laid down sentencing guidelines for trafficking in cocaine.  Between 10 and 50 grammes of cocaine, the sentence range is between 5 and 8 years’ imprisonment.  The narcotic content of the cocaine involved in this charge is 19.3 grammes. 

13.Having considered all the circumstances of the case and the mitigation put forward, I take a starting point of 68 months’ imprisonment.  Given that the defendant indicated his plea of guilty at the plea-day hearing and in light of the judgment of HKSAR v Ngo Van Nam [2016] 5 HKLRD 1, he is entitled to a full one-third discount of sentence.  The sentence is therefore reduced to 45 months’ imprisonment. 

14.Time after time, the court has expressed clearly that being in financial difficulty is no mitigating factor for committing a crime, and family hardship is not a mitigating factor.  See HKSAR v To Yiu Cho [2009] 5 HKLRD 309.  There is no other mitigating factor which justifies a further discount of sentence.  The defendant is sentenced to 45 months’ imprisonment.