HKSAR v. Tang Ka Wo
Read the full judgment text of DCCC 1075/2018 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment.
1. The Defendant pleads guilty to trafficking in a dangerous drug.
Cites 2 cases
|
DCCC 1075/2018 [2019] HKDC 741 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1075 OF 2018 -----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
---------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ---------------------------- Charge and facts 1.The Defendant pleads guilty to trafficking in a dangerous drug. 2.At about 2143 hours on 3 August 2018, CO 98244 and SCO 9534 intercepted the Defendant in the Customs Departure Hall of the Hong Kong–Macau Ferry Terminal (“HK-MFT Departure Hall”) in Sheung Wan, Hong Kong for customs clearance. 3.Upon body search, a transparent plastic bag (E1) wrapped by a white tissue (E2) was found inside the Defendant’s left sport shoes (E3). 4.Inside E1, there was a transparent plastic bag (E4) which contained 73 small plastic bags containing white crystalline solid suspected to be dangerous drugs (E5) and 23 plastic straw packets containing suspected dangerous drugs (E6). 5.The Defendant was arrested. Under caution, the Defendant admitted that the substance contained in E1 was a dangerous drug which he was delivering to Macau for a male in return for a HK$3,000 reward. 6.Immigration movement record of the Defendant recorded his departure from Hong Kong via the Macau Ferry Terminal after he had passed the immigration control point at 2142 hours on 3 August 2018. 7.E5 and E6 were examined by the Government Chemist and confirmed to consist of a total of 18.12 grammes of a solid containing 14.7 grammes of cocaine, as follows:-
8.At the time of the offence, the street value of E5 and E6 is estimated at $17,848.20 in total (HK$985 x 18.12 grammes). 9.At all material times, the Defendant was in possession of the cocaine involved in this case for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. Mitigation 10.The Defendant is now 19 years old. He was 18 at the time of the offence. He has a clear record. He had attained lower secondary education. He had been unemployed for a month when he was arrested. Back then, he worked as a warehouse technician earning HK$13,000 per month. 11.His mother is an insurance broker. His younger brother is a F. 2 student. When he was detained for the present case, his maternal grandfather, who was a priest, passed away due to illness in February. He had a strong affection for his late grandfather. He had a mitigating letter from him. His maternal uncle’s mitigating letter described how the Defendant had been discriminated by schoolmates and traumatized since the age of 10 by his father’s suicide upon being harassed by creditors. Sentencing considerations 12.It is 5 – 8 years’ imprisonment for trafficking in 10 – 50 grammes of cocaine (Attorney General v Rojas [1994] 1 HKC 342; R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370). Sentencing the Defendant 13.The drug involved was for export and delivery to others. He was 18 and had a clear record at the time of the offence. I consider a starting point of 5 years (ie 60 months) appropriate. His personal circumstance has not been pleasant but it is not a mitigating factor. One-third off for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 3 years 4 months (ie 40 months).
|