HKSAR v. Chan Kai Kam

HCCC 38/2019

[2019] HKCFI 1455

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 38 OF 2019

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:

Background and the Facts

The accused pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug at the Eastern Magistrates’ Courts on 28 January 2019 and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence.

This morning, he confirmed his plea before me and accepted the Summary of Facts.

Briefly, on 9 June 2018, the accused was intercepted for a search after he had alighted from a mini bus. In the course of the search, the police found a piece of tissue paper wrapping a transparent resealable plastic bag of ‘Ice’ inside his underpants. The ‘Ice’, that is the methamphetamine hydrochloride, had the weight of 27.2 grammes.

Under caution, the accused admitted helping someone to deliver the drug, as he got no money. In the subsequent video-recorded interview, the accused confirmed the same but said that he did not know which particular drug was involved, nor its weight and value.

In the Summary of Facts admitted by the accused, it was disclosed that the estimated retail value of the drug was about HK$14,500.

The Accused’s Background and Mitigation

The accused was born in Hong Kong and is now aged 41. He has attained Form 3 education level but had no stable job at the time of arrest. According to Mr Chau, the accused was a casual worker then and if work was available, he would earn about $500 per day.

The accused has got 19 previous criminal convictions. Four of those were drug-related offences, including two possession of a dangerous drug and two trafficking in a dangerous drug convictions.

He was respectively sentenced in February 2008 and February 2013 to 2 years and 5 years and 7 months’ imprisonment for his trafficking offences.

In mitigation, Mr Chau frankly accepted that although the accused was a drug addict and his urine test was ‘Ice’ positive after his arrest, there was no claim whatsoever for self-consumption in the present case.

In relation to the accused’s record, Mr Chau urged this court not to enhance the accused’s sentence.

Tariffs and Sentencing Guidelines

The revised tariffs for trafficking in ‘Ice’ were laid down in the case of HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691. For trafficking between 10 and 70 grammes of ‘Ice’, a term of imprisonment of 7 to 11 years is called for.

Sentencing in this Case

Having considered the amount of ‘Ice’ involved and the facts of this case, I am going to adopt a starting point of 8 years and 3 months. That is 99 months.

The accused pleaded guilty at the committal stage. He will be given the full one-third reduction for his plea.

Now, although the accused has got previous drug trafficking convictions, I do not consider it necessary to enhance the sentence in this case because of his record. Firstly, those two trafficking convictions are quite far apart, one in 2008 and the other in 2013, not one succeeding another shortly. Further, both are some years prior to his commission of the present offence. Therefore, having considered all the relevant matters, I do not consider an enhancement to be necessary in the present case.

Other than the accused’s plea, which I have mentioned earlier, there is nothing in this case which would warrant any further reduction in sentence. 99 months reduced by one-third is 66 months’ imprisonment, and this is the term I impose on the accused in respect of the charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, to which he has pleaded guilty.

Court rises - 9.52 am
16 May 2019