HKSAR v. Kepals Andris

HCCC 23/2026

[2026] HKCFI 3570

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 23 OF 2026

________________

________________

_________________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

_________________________________

The Charge

1.On 12 January 2026, the defendant pleaded guilty in the magistracy to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.  The charge involved 5.15 kilogrammes of a solid containing 4.32 kilogrammes of cocaine.  On the same day, the defendant admitted a Summary of Facts dated 30 December 2025 and he was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentencing.  Today, before this Court, the defendant confirmed his guilty plea to the trafficking charge and his admission of the Summary of Facts.

Facts Admitted

2.The facts of the case can be summarized as follows.

3.In the evening on 13 June 2024, the defendant arrived at the Hong Kong International Airport from Paris, France via Doha, Qatar.  The defendant was intercepted at Customs Arrival Hall B for customs clearance.  He was carrying a backpack and a suitcase (“Suitcase”) at the time.  When a Customs officer inspected the contents of the Suitcase, he found some plastic packets concealed inside a toy and they were later found to contain the quantity of cocaine as set out in the charge.  The estimated street value of the cocaine was HK$4,413,550 (for cocaine powder) or HK$5,381,750 (for crack cocaine).

4.A video-recorded interview was conducted with the defendant, during which he admitted under caution, inter alia, that:-

(a) He had come to Hong Kong alone. He did not know he would be coming to Hong Kong until he saw the air tickets. He did not know who booked the air tickets and who paid for them. He was supposed to stay in Hong Kong for 2 to 3 days and he was told to stay in the hotel;

(b) An acquaintance of the defendant introduced him to a male named “Edge” for earning quick money. The defendant met Edge in May in Latvia and Edge asked him if he could help fly to France for setting up a company for a reward of EURO l,000;

(c) The defendant received air tickets for his flights from Riga to Paris by WhatsApp. He was given EURO 300 when he left Riga;

(d) The defendant called Edge when he arrived Paris, who arranged for someone to take him to the hotel. On the next day, a male came to see him at the hotel, paid for the hotel charges and gave him EURO 70 before putting him on a taxi to the airport;

(e) The defendant received a WhatsApp message from Edge saying someone would give him a suitcase in the transit area in the airport at Doha. The defendant arrived in Doha and inside the airport there, an unknown person gave him the Suitcase and USD500; and

(f) The defendant brought the Suitcase with him on his flight to Hong Kong.

5.In the Summary of Facts, the defendant admitted that at the material time, he trafficked in the dangerous drugs by importing them into Hong Kong.

Background andmitigation

6.The defendant was born in Latvia and is now aged 48.  He is not married but has a son who is now an adult residing in the United States.

7.The defendant left school after being educated up to grade 9.  He has no qualifications but he is able to speak Latvian and Russian.  Before his arrest, he used to live with his mother in Latvia and his father has already passed away.

8.Prior to the offence, he had worked a construction worker and as a janitor in a hospital, but had been unemployed for one year or so.

9.Counsel acting for the defendant, Mr. Turnbull, told the Court that the defendant had a girlfriend but they broke up and as a result he commenced drinking heavily and taking drugs. He became an alcoholic and a drug addict.  The defendant had no income before committing this offence.

10.Mr. Turnbull also told the Court that the defendant was befriended by a woman who persuaded him to take the trip.  He thus travelled first to Paris where he stayed in a hotel for one day and he next flew to Doha where at the airport he was given the Suitcase by a male he had never met before.  He then took the flight to Hong Kong and was arrested at the airport for possession of the dangerous drugs inside the Suitcase.

11.Mr. Turnbull submitted that there are mitigating factors in the present case, namely his plea of guilty at the first available opportunity, his remorse as evidenced by the acceptance of full responsibility for the crime, his clear record in Hong Kong, and the remote chance of reoffending.

12.Mr. Turnbull submitted that this was an offence committed by the defendant who was clearly in need of money because of his alcoholism and drug addiction and he was preyed upon by a drug syndicate.

Sentence

13.In sentencing the defendant, I will follow the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, bearing in mind also the Court of Appeal’s guidance in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.

14.The tariffs for sentencing an offence of trafficking in cocaine are set out in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang (No. 3) [2025] 2 HKLRD 138.  For cocaine with a quantity between 1,500 grammes and 5,000 grammes, the starting point is 20 to 24 years’ imprisonment (§62 of the Judgment).  Given the quantity involved in the present case (namely 4,320 grammes), the notional starting point in sentencing is about 23 years and 2 months’ imprisonment.

15.Turning to the role and culpability of the defendant.  His role was to bring the dangerous drugs from Doha into Hong Kong.  As he admitted in the Summary of Facts, he had trafficked in the dangerous drugs by importing them into Hong Kong.  There is clearly an international element in the offence which justifies an enhancement.  Taking into account all the circumstances of the offence in the present case, I will enhance the notional starting point by 10 months to bring about an enhanced starting point of 24 years’ imprisonment.

16.Given the seriousness of the offence, the only real and strong mitigating factor in the defendant’s case is his guilty plea which was entered at the earliest opportunity.  Because of that, he is entitled to a full one-third discount.  Applying the one-third discount to the enhanced starting point of 24 years, that will result in a final sentence of 16 years’ imprisonment.

17.I consider this sentence fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.  Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for 16 years.

Ms Grace Au, SPP of the Department of Justice, for the Prosecution

Mr. Richard Turnbull, instructed byMessrs. Heung Massie & Clement, assigned by DLA, for the Defendant