HKSAR v. Lai Cho Wing

HCCC 288/2017

[2018] HKCFI 556

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 288 OF 2017

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:

The defendant was charged with two counts of trafficking in dangerous drugs. She pleaded guilty at the Magistracy, and committed for sentence.

For the 1st count, the dangerous drug involved is 5.65 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as “Ice”.

For the 2nd count, the dangerous drug involved is 891.4 grammes of “Ice”.

On 24 January 2017, the defendant was stopped by police in Yau Ma Tei. The “Ice” in relation to the 1st count was found on the defendant. Under caution, the defendant admitted that she helped someone to deliver the “Ice” on her to others at McDonalds. There are keys found on the defendant, and the police executed a search warrant of the premises where keys found on the defendant were used to open the door.

The “Ice” in relation to the 2nd count was found inside the premises. Under caution, the defendant admitted that she helped others to look after those “Ice” found in the premises. The estimated market value of all the “Ice” involved was over HK$257,000.

The defendant is 26 years old, she was educated up to Form 3 level, she is single, and living with her boyfriend before arrest. She has got three previous convictions, all related to theft. Before arrest, she was a casual worker in the catering service. She earned $13,000 to $14,000 per month.

According to Mr Davies, counsel representing the defendant, she gave half of her income to her grandmother.

In mitigation, Mr Davies said the defendant is now very remorseful. She studied English in the prison, and obtained very good scores. I have been shown the results of the defendant in the English subject, and it shows a rather good result.

Trafficking in a dangerous drug is a very serious offence. The Court of Appeal has laid down a tariff for sentence in respect of different kinds of drugs.

As rightfully pointed out by Mr Davies, for a large quantity of drugs involved, similar to the present case, the starting point for sentence is in the range of 20 to 23 years’ imprisonment.

Taking into account counsel’s mitigation, in particular that the defendant has shown her remorse in pleading guilty, and she has put in tremendous effort in her study in prison, I will adopt the lowest starting point within the range.

In respect of the 1st count, I will adopt a starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment. And taking into account your guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 40 months’ imprisonment, which is 3 years and 4 months.

For the 2nd count, I would adopt a starting point of 20 years’ imprisonment, taking into account your guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 13 years and 4 months. The sentence of the two counts be served concurrently.