HKSAR v. Diu Chun-faat

DCCC 1070/2017

[2018] HKDC 659

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1070 OF 2017

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.The defendant, a 19-year-old man, pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking. The drugs involved were 95.2 grammes of powder containing 46 grammes of ketamine.

2.In the afternoon on 14 August 2017, a police officer patrolling near Kwai Chung Sportsground in Kwai Chung stopped the defendant for a search and found the drugs in this case from the bag the defendant was carrying.  The drugs were put in 26 smaller plastic bags in one big bag.

3.The defendant told the police that the drugs were for his own consumption, but later, when police retrieved the WeChat messages from his mobile phone, which told a different story, those messages showed that the defendant was receiving instructions from others to deal in drugs.  For example, the defendant was told to go to a particular spot, asked to check the drugs and to take photographs.  The photograph the defendant sent to the person matched the drugs seized.

4.The street value of the drugs seized is estimated to be about $18,000.

5.The defendant has no prior convictions.

6.He was born in the mainland and came to Hong Kong two years later.  He received education here up to Form 3 level and then quit school thereafter.

7.The court heard that the defendant had a part‑time job as a waiter in a restaurant for about a month before his arrest.  As he had no regular income, and under the bad influence of dubious characters, he took up the job of trafficking offered to him by his friends for a reward of $1,000. But before he could get anything financially, he was caught by the police.

8.In his letter to the court, the defendant admitted his foolishness in not realizing the serious consequences of his action then, blaming himself for hurting his parents and other members of his family.  He promised that he would become a law‑abiding citizen after release from prison.

9.In fact, the defendant has the full support from his family.  The whole family, including members of his family and relatives, 14 of them, are in court today to show support and concern for the defendant.

10.There are also letters from his parents, social worker and former school principal pleading leniency on his behalf.

11.Trafficking is a heinous crime.  It hardly needs telling that the kind of harm drugs could bring to our society as a whole, courts have always been tough on drugs, especially on those who bring the harm directly to the society such as drug dealers.

12.In view of the defendant’s young age and clear record, counsel asked the court to consider calling for reports before sentencing.  He suggested detention centre or training centre as a sentencing option.

13.The appellate court often said, when dealing with serious offences such as drug trafficking, young age and clear record as mitigating factors paled into insignificance.  In fact, there have been a number of recent authorities on this.  The Higher Court said even training centre is not an appropriate sentencing option for serious offences like trafficking.

14.There are sentencing guidelines for trafficking in this type of drug.  For trafficking between 10 and 50 grammes of ketamine, a term of 4 to 6 years is to be considered.

15.Given the amount the defendant admitted trafficking, i.e. 46 grammes, I take 69 months as a starting point.  His plea is timely, so he is entitled to a full one-third discount.

16.After giving the appropriate discount, the starting point is reduced to 46 months.

17.There being no other reason for further reduction, the defendant is therefore sentenced to 46 months’ imprisonment.