COURT: Defendant had pleaded guilty in the lower court to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely, 11.2 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and 27.2 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. He had also pleaded guilty to possession of dangerous drugs, namely, a plastic bag containing 0.71 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 0.70 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and one plastic bottle containing 31 millilitres of a liquid containing 0.09 grammes of a solid upon drying containing methamphetamine.
The facts are not unusual in that the defendant had on 24 January 2021 checked into a hotel in Wan Chai with his girlfriend. On 26 January, when the police arrived at his room, the equipment for smoking was found on a bedside table and also the drugs which is the subject matter of the 2nd charge.
The defendant returned to the room and in his presence, a search was conducted in the room. And in the presence of the defendant, the wardrobe was searched, and inside the safe were found the dangerous drugs which is the subject matter of the 1st charge. And also found was an electronic scale amongst other things and six lighters and 20 resealable transparent plastic bags.
The defendant, upon arrest and caution, said that the drugs were for his own consumption. And subsequently, in a video-recorded interview, he claimed that all the drugs were for his own consumption and that he had bought it from somebody in Sham Shui Po for about $10,000. And he said that the drugs had nothing to do with his girlfriend and that he was unemployed and borrowed money from his family for buying the drugs.
The total market value of the drugs is $20,443.
The defendant is aged 26 and has four previous convictions of which two were for possession of dangerous drugs and one for trafficking. The one for trafficking was in 2016 when he was sentenced in the District Court to 26 months’ imprisonment.
In mitigation, Ms Ku has said everything that she can possibly say on his behalf and she urges this court to give him a concurrent sentence for the two offences and to give him an extra discount for his own consumption.
Now, the facts are quite clear in that the defendant could not have afforded these drugs for his own consumption. The presence of the scale and the plastic bags do suggest that he was financing his habit from drug trafficking. The fact of the matter is that drug trafficking is getting very difficult to investigate with people like the defendant, who checks into hotel rooms and do these small trade.
And so as the Court of Appeal has recognised for drug trafficking cases, they have laid down guideline sentences for drug trafficking in different drugs. In this case, the Court of Appeal guideline in the case of Tam Yi Chun in 2016 was that for trafficking in between 10 to 70 grammes, the suggested sentence is between 7 to 11 years.
In this case, the total amount of drugs was under 40 grammes. And in relation to Charge 1, it would be 38.4 grammes, so I would adopt a starting point of 9 years’ imprisonment. And because he did plead guilty in the lower court and thus reflecting his remorse, I am going to give him the full one-third discount and it is reduced to 6 years’ imprisonment.
In relation to the 2nd count, it is for possession and I would adopt a starting point of 6 months, reduced to 4 months because of his plea. And I agree with Ms Ku that the sentence would be concurrent with the sentence in the 1st count. Thus, making it a sentence of 6 years. But I am not prepared to give a further discount in relation to the own consumption point because his own consumption is already reflected in the 2nd count.
So, the defendant will go to prison for 6 years.