HKSAR v. Ling Zhiquan
|
HCCC 252/2025 [2026] HKCFI 4329 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CRIMINAL CASE NO 252 OF 2025 ________________________
________________________
________________________ REASONS FOR SENTENCE ________________________ 1.The defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug and admitted the Summary of Facts in the committal proceedings at the Eastern Magistracy on 28 July 2025. The case was then committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Before this court, the defendant confirmed his plea and his agreement to the Summary of Facts through counsel. 2.The particulars of the charges state as follows. Regarding Charge 1, on 3 September 2023, at the lobby of Tsap King Mansion, No. 50 Yuet Wah Street, Kwun Tong, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 175 grammes of a mixture containing 144 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. 3.Regarding Charge 2, on 3 September 2023, at Room A, Flat M, 3rd Floor, Tsap King Mansion, No. 50 Yuen Wah Street, Kwun Tong, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 2,927.78 grammes of a mixture containing 2,405.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. 4.The Summary of Facts admitted by the defendant provides, inter alia, as follows. On 3 September 2023 in the morning, the police mounted an anti-narcotics operation at Tsap King Mansion, No. 50 Yuet Wah Street, Kwun Tong (“Tsap King Mansion”). At around 11.13 am, police officers spotted the defendant acting in a furtive manner at the lobby of Tsap King Mansion and thus intercepted the defendant for enquiry. 5.At that time, the defendant was holding a white paper bag. Subsequently, upon search, it was found that the paper bag contained a resealable plastic bag containing 175 grammes of a mixture containing 144 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The defendant was also found in possession of three mobile phones and a bunch of keys. 6.At around 11.20 am, the defendant was arrested and cautioned by the police. Under caution, the defendant stated that he was in debt and he was paid $1,000 by a person called “Ah Leung” to deliver the “4 chai” (a reference to No. 4 heroin) to To Kwa Wan. 7.At around 11.30 am, the police escorted the defendant to Room A, Flat M, 3rd Floor of Tsap King Mansion (the “Premises”). Executing a search warrant, the police entered the Premises with the keys found on the defendant. Upon a house search, the following items, inter alia, were found on a wooden table inside the Premises:
8.At around 11.40 am, the defendant was cautioned again. When further cautioned in respect of the items found at the Premises, the defendant stated that all the “4 chai” found on the table was previously weighed and packaged by him for further onward delivery. 9.A total of 2,927.78 grammes of a mixture containing 2,405.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride was found at the Premises by the police (Charge 2). Coupled with the drugs found on the defendant at the lobby of Tsap King Mansion, a total of 3,102.78 grammes of a mixture containing 2,549.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride was seized by the police (Charges 1 and 2). 10.The estimated street value of all the dangerous drugs seized, that is those found on the defendant and those found from the Premises, was around HK$2,438,589. 11.The defendant expressly admits that at the material time of the offence, he had knowledge of the 2,549.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride seized and was knowingly in possession of all the said dangerous drugs seized for the purpose of unlawful trafficking in their entirety. 12.The personal background of the defendant is as follows. The defendant was born in Mainland China and came to Hong Kong in 2013. He is now aged 24 and was 21 at the time of the offences. He is single and, prior to his arrest, resided with his mother and his elder sister. Following his parents’ early divorce, the defendant was brought up in a single-parent household and was primarily cared for by his maternal grandmother, while his mother worked as a hawker to provide for the entire family. 13.The defendant received education up to associate degree level at one Guangzhou Huashang Vocational Technical School. He started working as a construction worker in 2020 to support his sister who was studying traditional Chinese medicine, and to alleviate his mother’s financial burden. 14.Unfortunately, he was laid off in early 2022 due to the impact of the COVID pandemic and had to rely on loans to make ends meet. As time went by, the defendant accumulated debt to the tune of some HK$60,000 and was unable to repay his debt. It was under these circumstances that he was lured by Ah Leung, referred to in the Summary of Facts, to commit the present offences. 15.The sentencing approach for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug is laid down in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, which is further clarified in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186. The first step is to identify the relevant sentencing band (or bracket) applicable to the quantity of drug concerned. The second step is an assessment of the role and culpability of the defendant based on evidence before the court. The third step is to identify where in the relevant band of the guidelines the defendant comes. It may be necessary to go outside the band to reflect the particular circumstances of the offence and the role of the defendant. The fourth step is to consider aggravating factors which bear on the “notional sentence after trial”. The fifth step is to have regard to any matters of mitigation, bearing in mind that “personal circumstances will count for little, unless they are exceptional.” The sixth and final step is for the judge to stand back and look at the overall sentence passed in order to ensure that it is a “fair, just, and balanced sentence”. 16.Regarding the first step, the task is to identify the appropriate range applicable to the total quantity of drugs involved. As the dangerous drug the subject matter of the two charges were found on the same occasion, I consider it appropriate to treat all the dangerous drugs seized as one lot of drug and to ascertain an appropriate global starting point for the same. 17.The total quantity of drugs seized in respect of Charge 1 and Charge 2 is 2,549.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. For 1,500 to 5,000 grammes of heroin, the applicable guideline tariff band is that of 20 to 24 years’ imprisonment: see HKSAR v Huang Ruifang (No.3) [2025] 2 HKLRD 138, at paragraph 62. 18.Second, concerning the defendant’s role and culpability, I accept that the defendant was a courier or storekeeper of the drug. 19.Third, for a total quantity of 2,549.19 grammes of heroin, an arithmetical approach towards the guidelines would lead to a “notional sentence after trial” of 21 years and 2.3 months’ imprisonment. In view of my aforesaid finding of the defendant’s role and culpability, I consider that 21 years and 2.3 months would be the appropriate global “notional sentence after trial” for the offences in question. 20.Fourth, I consider that there is no aggravating feature which would enhance the “notional sentence after trial”. 21.Fifth, I consider that the only mitigating factor which may reduce the defendant’s sentence is his timely guilty plea, for which I will give him a one-third discount. Accordingly, the global sentence to be imposed on the defendant on Charge 1 and Charge 2 is 14 years and 1 month’s imprisonment. 22.To achieve that global sentence, I will sentence the defendant as follows:
23.Finally, I consider that an overall sentence of 14 years and 1 month’s imprisonment is a fair, just and balanced sentence in all the circumstances of this case and in the circumstances of the defendant.
Ms Grace Au, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR Mr Lo Chi-lam Caesar, instructed by C F Lee & Co, assigned by DLA, for the accused |
Cases cited in this judgment