HKSAR v. Chong Ka Kin

HCCC 328/2024

[2025] HKCFI 5538

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 328 OF 2024

-----------------

-----------------

---------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

---------------------------------

COURT: The defendant in this case (D2 in HCCC 9/2025) has pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance and is committed to this court for sentence.

In the evening on 12 December 2022, the defendant was intercepted by customs officers outside one residential estate in Yuen Long. On the brown bag he was carrying, customs officers found 743 grammes of cocaine. Inside an apartment of the same estate where the defendant and his girlfriend resided, customs officers found additional drug paraphernalia for the purpose of trafficking.

The defendant was then brought to his own home for another house search in the evening. Inside his home, customs officers found 1,501 grammes of cannabis in its herbal form, 14.32 grammes of cocaine, and 0.2 grammes of ketamine.

The street value of all those dangerous drugs was estimated to be over HK$1.1 million.

The defendant admitted that he was in possession of those dangerous drugs for the purpose of trafficking.

The defendant is now 21 and has one criminal record, not similar. Prior to his arrest, he was unemployed.

Starting point for trafficking in 743 grammes of cocaine based on quantity alone would be 16 years and 11 months’ imprisonment. After a plea, the sentence for Count 1 will be reduced to 11 years and 3 months.

Parties from both sides have kindly agreed that starting point for trafficking in both cocaine and cannabis in its herbal form in Charge 2 would be one of 5 years and 3 months’ imprisonment. After a plea, the sentence for Count 2 is reduced to one of 3 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

The amount of ketamine in this particular case was so minute that it could be ignored for the purpose of sentencing.

Again, mitigation letters from family members and friends have been produced and they understandably ask the court to exercise leniency on the defendant.

After a careful consideration of the circumstances of this case, in particular where all the drugs found are effectively in both the defendant’s residences, it is ordered that 1 month of Count 2 is to be run consecutively to the 11 years and 3 months imposed on Count 1, making a total of 11 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.

The defendant in HCCC 9/2025 was given an imprisonment term of 9 years and 4 months. The two cases were practically very much apart. His role in these two cases was different. The drugs involved were different. However, given the proximity of the timing, the defendant’s relatively young age, the avoidance of a crushing sentence, and hopefully his future potential rehabilitation plan, it is ordered that half of the 9 years and 4 months will be served consecutively to the 11 years and 4 months imposed in this case, thus making a total of 16 years’ imprisonment.

So for the two cases, the defendant is ordered to serve 16 years’ imprisonment altogether.