COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty on 11 August 2025 to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Today, he confirms his plea and admission of the Summary of Facts.
The particulars of the offence are as follows.
The defendant, a Peruvian national, arrived on 13 August 2023, at Customs Arrival Hall A, Passenger Terminal Building 1, Hong Kong International Airport, and unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely, 1.3 kilogrammes of a liquid containing 810 grammes of cocaine.
The estimated street value of that amount of cocaine was $995,490.
On the date of this offence, the defendant arrived from Brazil, via Addis Ababa, into Hong Kong Airport, and was intercepted as he attempted to pass through the Green Channel at Customs Arrival Hall A. He was suspected to have ingested drugs and was sent to North Lantau Hospital.
Later at hospital, he discharged 39 pellets, which upon examination contained a total of 1.3 kilogrammes of liquid containing 810 grammes of cocaine. He was arrested and cautioned. He admitted he was offered US$5,000 to swallow the pellets and bring them to Hong Kong. He would only be paid when he returned to Peru. He assumed he had swallowed cocaine, as it is what is produced in Peru.
Mitigation
The defendant is a Peruvian national who is now 78 years old. Mr Boyton has said all he can possibly say on behalf of the defendant. He has told me his background, family circumstances, his work history and health situation. He was homeless, having been duped out of his home and inheritance. He was working as a cleaner to make ends meet, despite suffering from a respiratory disease. He was preyed upon by a so-called friend and offered what to him must have been a large amount of money to bring drugs to Hong Kong.
Mr Boyton, although not suggesting it is a mitigating factor that carries much weight, points out that realistically this defendant is unlikely to ever go home. Sadly, he is unlikely to outlive his sentence. I have received a letter from the defendant today and I have read its contents.
Sentencing
I have considered the approach to sentencing those that traffic in dangerous drugs. With the Court of Appeal’s guidance in the most recent authority, HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150, I now consider the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290.
In the approach to sentencing, a number of steps have been identified which the court should take, such as assessing the gravity of the offence and applicable guideline; identifying the defendant’s role and culpability; where within the guideline the defendant should lie; any aggravating factors; any mitigating factors; and lastly passing a sentence which is fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.
The first step is to assess the gravity of the offence and identify the applicable guideline according to the drug seized. The sentencing guideline for cocaine is now found in the most recent authority of HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234. The starting point for trafficking in cocaine between 500 to 1,500 grammes is 16 to 20 years’ imprisonment. Mathematically speaking, trafficking in 810 grammes of cocaine will attract a starting point of 17 years and 2 months’ imprisonment.
I have considered the evidence, the defendant’s role, his culpability, there is no evidence to suggest he was anything more than a courier bringing drugs into Hong Kong. I find the mathematical starting point, having considered all of the circumstances, one of 17 years’ imprisonment appropriate in his case.
The fourth and fifth steps require me to consider whether there are any aggravating factors or any exceptional mitigating factors. I find no such factors in this case.
The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is entitled to a full one-third discount. I will take a starting point of 17 years’ imprisonment and reduce it by one-third. The defendant will be sentenced to 11 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
With the last step of the six steps in mind, I consider this sentence to be fair, just and balanced in light of the circumstances of the offence as well as the defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to a total, I repeat, 11 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
