COURT: Defendant, on 2 July 2024, you pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs before a magistrate at the Eastern Magistracy. As a result of your plea of guilty, you were committed here to the Court of First Instance for sentence.
You admitted that on 6 November 2022, at the staircase of No. 34 Nam Kok Road, Kowloon City, you unlawfully trafficked in 27.4 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 27.2 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. You admitted the Summary of Facts dated 30 April 2024.
The facts in support of the charge are as follows. On 6 November 2022, at about 10.40 pm, police officers, whilst on patrol, saw you acting furtively near the junction of Nam Kok Road and Nga Tsin Wai Road. They approached and attempted to intercept you. However, you rushed into a building at No. 34 Nam Kok Road. The officers chased after you and intercepted you at the staircase between the ground and 1st floor.
Upon search of your jacket’s inner pocket, the drugs, otherwise commonly known as ‘Ice’ as quantified in the charge, were found contained in a plastic bag inside a cigarette box. You were arrested, and under caution, you admitted that you were in debt and you helped to bring “the pork” to others.
In a subsequent video-recorded interview, you stated that shortly before the officers intercepted you at around 10.30 pm, a male known as Ah Fai gave the ‘Ice’ to you in a park in Kowloon City. You were waiting for further instructions to deliver the ‘Ice’. You were to be rewarded for the delivery. However, you were arrested by the police.
The estimated street value of the ‘Ice’ was about $15,591.
I turn now to the mitigation and background. Defendant, you are a Thai national who arrived in Hong Kong in 2009. You are currently aged 42 and single. You were educated up to secondary level 2. You have 11 previous convictions. All but one are related to dangerous drugs, two of which are similar to the present charge. That is of trafficking in dangerous drugs.
I am informed by Mr Duncan Percy, your counsel, that you were living with your girlfriend at the material time of arrest and were in regular employment. Your father passed away in 2023 whilst your mother is in her 70s, and in your letter, it states she is 75. At the time of your arrest, you were a drug addict.
Mr Percy informed this court that you had been a drug addict for well over 20 years and started when you were about 16 years of age. In fact, after your arrest, you were remanded in custody and underwent a medical examination upon your admission to the Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre, at which the superintendent for the centre confirms that the urine specimen collected from you on 9 November 2022 shows positive for the drug amphetamine, otherwise referred to as ‘Ice’.
I turn now to the sentence. The sentence approach to sentencing in drug-trafficking cases are the ones laid down in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290 and complemented in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150.
The application of the principles and that of Herry Jane Yusuph are a six-step approach. The first step is to assess the gravity of the offence and identify the relevant guideline band applicable to the quantity of drugs concerned. The type of drugs involved in this case is that of ‘Ice’, and the tariff case for the drug ‘Ice’ is set out in the authority of HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691. The amount trafficked of 27.2 grammes of ‘Ice’ falls in the band of between 10 to 70 grammes where the Court of Appeal has set down a starting point of between 7 to 11 years’ imprisonment after trial.
The second step is to assess the role and culpability of the offender based on the evidence. On the evidence before this court, as Mr Percy rightly submits, it’s that you were a courier delivering the drugs. You were to deliver the drugs to someone else. At that time, you were waiting for instructions.
The third step is to identify where in the relevant band you come. Given the circumstances of the offence and the role that you were a courier, being the lowest rank in the hierarchy, taking into account that third band, I consider that an appropriate starting point, should you have been convicted after trial, would be one of 7 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.
The fourth step is a consideration of any aggravating factors such as previous similar criminal records. Defendant, you have two previous convictions committed on one occasion of trafficking in dangerous drugs in the year of 2013, to which you were sentenced to 3 years 8 months’ imprisonment.
These offences of trafficking were committed now nine years ago. Taking into account the long period of time between your last conviction of trafficking and this conviction of trafficking, I shall exercise my discretion and not enhance your sentence.
The fifth step is to consider any mitigating factors. I do not consider there to be any personal mitigating factors. The most significant mitigating factor is your early plea of guilty. For this, you will benefit from a one-third discount to your sentence from the starting point. The starting point for your sentence being 7 years and 9 months’ imprisonment, shall be reduced to 5 years and 2 months, and this is the term to which you shall serve.
The sixth step is that I must ensure that the sentence passed is fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and you, the offender. And this I so do. You shall therefore be sentenced to a term of 5 years and 2 months’ imprisonment.