HKSAR v. Ng Ping Fat
Read the full judgment text of HCCC 256/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 25 October 2017.
Cites 1 case
|
HCCC 256/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CRIMINAL CASE NO 256 OF 2017 -----------------
-----------------
--------------------------------------------- Transcript of the Audio Recording --------------------------------------------- COURT: Defendant, you pleaded guilty before a magistrate at the Eastern Magistracy for a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to sections 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance. You have admitted that on 16 December 2016, at the Customs Arrival Hall, of Wo Lo Control Point, New Territories, you unlawfully trafficked in 88.8 grammes of a mixture containing 72.4 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 289 tablets and 22 tablet fragments containing 4.1 grammes of midazolam. On the day in question, you had passed through the green channel and the customs officer conducted a search on your person. The drugs were found inside your jacket pocket. Under caution and arrest, you admitted that you knew that the plastic bag contained heroin and was given to you by unknown male in Shenzhen. You were promised a reward of $1,800 for delivery of the drugs. The estimated street value of the dangerous drugs were about $66,600 at the time of seizure. In a video-recorded interview under caution, you said that you were instructed to take the last train to Kowloon Tong to deliver the white plastic bag of drugs. At the time that you were intercepted by officers at the customs arrival hall was 2352 hours. Defendant, you are 65 years of age. You have 16 previous convictions, eight of those are related to dangerous drugs. Four of them are for possession of dangerous drugs and four of them are for trafficking in dangerous drugs. The latest conviction for trafficking was in 2011 to which you were sentenced to 5 years and 2 months’ imprisonment. Mr Victor Ho, your counsel, has informed this court that you had brought the drugs into Hong Kong from China. However, a certain amount of those drugs was to be used for your own consumption. You had in fact being a heroin taker for the last 30 years and your previous criminal record reflects this is correct. He informed me that you are still a heavy drug user and informed this court that although a certain amount was to be for your own use. It was not a significant proportion of drugs. Defendant, the guideline case set down for trafficking in heroin hydrochloride is that of Lau Tak Ming. You fall within band B of Lau Tak Ming where the band is between 50 and 200 grammes and the appropriate term of imprisonment is one between 8 to 12 years’ imprisonment after trial. Had you been convicted after trial, defendant, an appropriate starting point in this case would be 8 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. Defendant, there are aggravating factors calling for enhancement of the starting point in your case. The first of those being that you had brought these drugs into Hong Kong from China and this is commonly referred to as the international element. Following the case of Chung Ping Kun, for amounts up to 250 grammes, a term of up to 6 months’ imprisonment is appropriate. For the international element, defendant, I enhance your sentence by 3 months’ imprisonment. Defendant, you are a trafficker who has previously been convicted on no less than four previous occasions for trafficking in dangerous drugs. I accept Mr Ho’s submission that your last conviction was however more than five years ago. In that case, I enhance the starting point by a further 3 months, taking that factor into account. In the circumstances, your sentencing point, had you been convicted after trial, would have been one of 9 years’ imprisonment. Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty. That term should be reduced to one of 6 years’ imprisonment. For the purpose of sentence and in adopting the case of HKSAR v Wong Kam Wo [2001] 2 HKLRD 290. The quantity of midazolam involved in this case is a very, very small amount and therefore I do not consider it to be of such significance such as to add anything further to the sentence I have passed. |
Cases cited in this judgment