The dangerous drugs involved are 18.57 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 17.97 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, 1.88 grammes of tablet fragments containing 0.14 grammes of methamphetamine and 140.35 grammes of cannabis in herbal form. Methamphetamine hydrochloride is commonly known as ‘Ice’.
The drugs were found by a police officer at unlicensed massage establishment located at Ground Floor of No 253 Tai Nan Street, Sham Shui Po. The defendant operated a massage establishment without licence there.
At the time when the drugs were discovered, the defendant admitted that the drugs belonged to her and had nothing to do with any other people.
Defendant is 48 years old. She was educated up to secondary school level. She is divorced and has a son aged 24. Her son, Mr Wong, has written a letter to this court asking for leniency to his mother.
The defendant has one previous criminal record, namely, managing an unlicensed establishment. She has no similar record for trafficking in dangerous drugs.
Now, trafficking in dangerous drugs is a very serious offence. A person committing this offence will inevitably receive a long custodial sentence. The sentence received will depend on the kind and quantity of drugs involved.
For ‘Ice’, in sentencing the defendant, this court should follow the tariff laid down by the Court of Appeal in the case of Tam Yi Chun. Under the tariff as submitted by Ms Wong, counsel for the defendant, for trafficking in 10 to 70 grammes of ‘Ice’, a starting point of 7 to 11 years’ imprisonment should be considered. In this case, the total quantity of ‘Ice’ involved is 18.11 grammes and therefore the starting point to be adopted should be 19 months’ imprisonment.
For cannabis, this court should consider the case AG v Tuen Shui Ming and to reduce the sentence by around 1 year for cannabis in herbal form because the tariff laid down in Tuen Shui Ming is applicable to cannabis resin.
In this case, given the quantity involved, I agree with Ms Wong that the starting point of sentence adopted should be around 4 months’ imprisonment.
In mitigation, Ms Wong submitted that the defendant possessed the subject drugs for social trafficking. However, whether the trafficking is for social purpose or not is, according to previous authorities, not quite relevant in consideration of sentence. On the other hand, Ms Wong also submitted that part of the drugs involved was for the defendant’s own consumption. This is a valid factor for consideration.
In the present case, taking into account the quantity and value of the ‘Ice’ involved and the fact that the urine test result of the defendant was positive, I am satisfied that a significant proportion of the ‘Ice’ found was for the defendant’s own consumption. However, I am not so satisfied in the case of the cannabis because the quantity and value of the cannabis found is relatively much higher and there is no objective evidence indicating that the defendant had consumed cannabis.
In the premises, I would adopt a starting point of 19 months’ imprisonment and in consideration of the fact that a significant proportion of the ‘Ice’ was for the defendant’s own consumption, I will reduce the part of sentence in relation to ‘Ice’ to 50 months’ imprisonment and I will, on top of these 50 months’ imprisonment, take into account the quantity of cannabis trafficked and adjust it upward to 54 months and that is the starting point in total for the charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs faced by the defendant. Taking into account the guilty plea and as submitted by Ms Wong, a full one-third discount should be given for the early plea.
The 54 months’ imprisonment sentence is reduced by one-third to 36 months. This is the sentence of the defendant.