Before the empanelment of the jury, the defendant pleaded not guilty to one count of trafficking in 27.4 grammes of a solid containing 27.3 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as ‘Ice’, but guilty to the lesser charge of simple possession. The plea was not acceptable to the prosecution and a trial ensued.
After trial, the defendant was found not guilty by the jury of trafficking but guilty of simple possession. I now deal with the sentence.
Concerning the facts, in a nutshell, it is a run-of-the-mill stop-and-search case. The prosecution evidence, which is wholly admitted by way of Agreed Facts, is that the defendant was stopped by a police officer, PW1, near exit B of MTR Mongkok East Station. After a search, PW1 found from the right front trousers pocket of the defendant a piece of tissue paper wrapping around a plastic bag containing ‘Ice’, P2, which is the subject matter of the charge. After arrest and under caution, the defendant said that the drugs were for his own consumption.
It is agreed that the estimated street value of the ‘Ice’ was HK$14,166.
It is also agreed that amphetamine was present in the defendant’s urine sample which was taken two days after his arrest, indicating that he had been using ‘Ice’.
Antecedent
The defendant is now aged 51. He was born in Hong Kong and received education up to Form 3. He is married with a son. He has eight court appearances with a total of 12 previous convictions with two similar respectively in June 2002 and September 2011. All of his other previous convictions are of relatively minor nature.
Sentence
As required by section 54A of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, a DATC report has been obtained for the defendant before sentence.
I trust that Mr So has said all that can be said in mitigation for the defendant. However, the report says that based on medical examination, clinical observation and the facts available including his positive urine test, the medical officer has come to a conclusion that the defendant is a drug dependant.
In view of his weak willpower and his lack of insight into his problems, another period of compulsory drug addiction treatment period coupled with intensive counselling and statutory supervision would be beneficial to him. He is, therefore, considered suitable for admission to a DATC and it is confirmed that a place is available for him.
In view of the content of the DATC report, I am not going to sentence the defendant to a prison term. However, for his welfare and in order that he can quit his drug habit which is the root of his problem, I accept the recommendation contained in the DATC report.
The defendant is sentenced to DATC.