HKSAR v. Chan Chun Hei

CACC 52/2022

[2022] HKCA 1326

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 52 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC NO 267 OF 2021)

_______________

_______________

Before: Hon Pang JA in Court

Date of Hearing:  30 August 2022

Date of Decision:  30 August 2022

Date of Reasons for Decision:  6 September 2022

________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION

________________________

1.The applicant was charged with trafficking in 2.7 g of cocaine in 3.07 g of solid (contained in 20 small packets) and dangerous driving. He pleaded to the lesser alternatives of simple possession and careless driving. They were rejected. After trial, he was found guilty of simple possession and dangerous driving (17 February 2022). Respectively, he was sentenced to 12 months and 6 months’ imprisonment, to be served partly consecutively and partly concurrently, giving a total of 15 months’ imprisonment (8 April 2022).

2.He applies for bail pending appeal against sentence.

3.Unless the amount of dangerous drug involved is less than one gramme, the normal starting point of sentence for simple possession is 12 to 18 months. I am not in any way persuaded that that the 18-month starting point in this case (15 months plus 3 months’ enhancement on account of the latent risk factor) is excessive.

4.In this case, the act of dangerous driving involved reversing in a one-way road upon seeing a police roadblock. The applicant did not stop until a light goods vehicle drove up from behind. For this dangerous attempt to evade the law, an immediate term of imprisonment is not wrong in principle. Arguably, the 6-month sentence is on the high side but, for the sake of argument, a 3-month term to be served wholly consecutively to the 12 months for simple possession (a completely different offence) would be unassailable.

5.The English cases on how the covid situation should impact upon sentences are irrelevant. The considerations involved are necessarily regime-sensitive and have little if any comparative value to the Hong Kong courts.

6.In my judgment, it is not reasonably arguable that the overall sentence in this case is wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. I refuse the applicant’s application.

Mr Simon So, instructed by Ho & Associates, for the Applicant

Mr Douglas Lau, PP of Department of Justice, for the Respondent