HKSAR v. Tang Kit Ching

Read the full judgment text of HCCC 275/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 24 May 2018.

Case No.HCCC 275/2017[2018] HKCFI 1298
Court
High Court CFI
Date24 May 2018
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCC 275/2017

[2018] HKCFI 1298

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 275 OF 2017

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  TANG Kit-ching  

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

Before: Hon Andrew Chan J
Date: 24 May 2018 at 9.49 am
Present: Mr Jeevan Hingorani, on fiat, for HKSAR
Ms Lui Wing-chun, Petra, instructed by Ivan Tang & Co, for the accused
Offence: Possession of a dangerous drug (管有危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:

Defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of possession of dangerous drug, contrary to section 8 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.

Summary of facts reveals the following:

On 10 June 2016, police officers conducted an anti-narcotic operation at Room 5, 5th Floor, Cheung Hing Building, Yau Ma Tei. The defendant, together with a baby, and her boyfriend, D1 in this case, were found inside the apartment.

A search was conducted. Two plastic bags containing 27.40 grammes of methamphetamine - “Ice” - and one plastic straw, upon drying, containing 0.01 grammes of methamphetamine, among others, were found on the table of the living room. Under caution, the defendant admitted that the “Ice” placed on the table was provided to her for consumption by her boyfriend, free of charge.

As to other matters found in the apartment she had no knowledge of them. She just went to the apartment to look for D1, who was her boyfriend. The “Ice” seized from the table had an estimated retail value of approximately HK$9,000.

The defendant is 31 and worked as a part-time saleslady prior to her arrest. She has two criminal convictions, all related to drugs.

On her last appearance I adjourned her sentence pending a DATC report. It is of the opinion of the correctional officer that the defendant is no longer a drug addict, hence unsuitable for admission to the DATC.

Guidelines on sentencing are clear. For simple possession the starting point will be one of 12 to 18 months’ imprisonment. This is the third time that the defendant had committed offences relating to drugs. The amount of “Ice” involved is not small, 27 grammes altogether. There is, however, no evidence to suggest that the drug in question belonged to the defendant. It seemed that the drug, rather, belonged to her boyfriend. As such, the risk of her passing the drug to others is insignificant.

Given the amount of drug involved, given her past criminal record, it seems to me that the appropriate starting point will be one of 18 months’ imprisonment. The defendant pleaded guilty to the charge in the Magistrates’ Court, as such she is entitled to a full one-third discount.

For the offence the defendant stands convicted, she is sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.