HKSAR v. Shahid

DCCC 506/2019

[2019] HKDC 1408

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 506 OF 2019

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.Defendant pleads guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs.

2.The facts of the case is that in execution of a search warrant, police officer entered into a flat at Tseung Kwan O.  A total of 1.94 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 1.88 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and 2.1 grammes of crystalline solid containing 0.15 grammes of methamphetamine were found inside the flat.

3.The defendant, who was the only person inside the flat at the material time, now admits that he was in possession of all the said dangerous drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Mitigation

4.The defendant came from Pakistan in 1996.  He is now 35 years old and has two previous conviction record, including one of possession of dangerous drugs and one of trafficking in dangerous drugs.  He discharged from prison last year.

5.At the material time of the offence, he was working as a construction site worker with a monthly income of about $20,000.  He contributed about $7,000 per month to support his mother who is now over 60 years old.

6.Mr Parry, counsel for the defendant, submits that part of the dangerous drugs were for own consumption and asks for a further reduction in sentence on top of the usual one-third discount for the timely guilty plea.

7.A urine test report indicates that the defendant was a drug abuser.  The dangerous drugs, namely the ‘Ice’ involved, is not of a substantial quantity and I accept that the market value of the ‘Ice’ is about $2,000, which is an amount for which the defendant can afford.  So despite a large number of empty transparent resealable plastic bags were found, I accept that a proportion, or a significant proportion, of the dangerous drugs was for his own consumption.

8.There are well-established tariffs for this kind of offence in that trafficking up to 10 grammes of ‘Ice’ attracts 3 to 7 years’ imprisonment (See HKSAR v Tam Yi ChunCACC 524/2011).  This case involved 2.05 grammes of ‘Ice’ and I adopt a starting point of 3 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.

9.As I accept that a significant proportion of the drugs was for his own consumption, I reduce the sentence to 39 months’ imprisonment.  Apart from the guilty plea, I fail to find any further reason to reduce the sentence.

10.Giving him the one-third discount, the defendant is sentenced to 26 months’ imprisonment.  Effectively, it means 2 years and 2 months.