COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty on 8 June 2026 to two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Today, he confirmed his plea and admission of the Summary of Facts.
The particulars of the 1st count are as follows: The defendant on 28 March 2025, near the lift lobby, 32nd Floor, Block 5, Tsing Yi Garden, New Territories unlawfully trafficked in 47.9 grammes of a solid containing 37.2 grammes of cocaine. The particulars of the 2nd count are as follows: On the same day, inside Flat A on the same floor of the same block in Tsing Yi Garden, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in 1,564 grammes of a solid containing 1,292 grammes of cocaine.
The facts are straightforward. The police were obviously acting on information and were waiting at the staircase outside Flat A. Just over two hours later, at around 4.37 pm, the defendant was observed leaving the premises and immediately intercepted.
After interception, he was searched and the police found a brown paper bag containing the drugs of Count 1 in his right
shorts pocket. The defendant was also in possession of keys and a resident card of the complex. He was arrested and under caution admitted he was paid to deliver and distribute dangerous drugs.
The defendant’s key opened Flat A and it was searched. The police found all the drugs of Count 2 in two resealable plastic bags as well as paraphernalia normally associated with weighing and packaging dangerous drugs for distribution.
He was arrested again and under caution admitted he was acting as a storekeeper paid to rent the premises to store the cocaine and distribute it as directed and instructed.
Upon investigation, the police discovered the premises were rented in the defendant’s name for a period of two years from 15 October 2024. The defendant admits the estimated street value of all the cocaine was around HK$1,291,864.
Mitigation
The defendant is now 27 years old. At the time of the offence, he was married and unemployed. Previously, he had worked as a kitchen assistant for eight years. He is not a man with a clear record but has no similar criminal convictions. He has two previous convictions dating back to 2018.
Mr So has said all he can possibly say on behalf of the defendant in mitigation. His best mitigation is his plea of guilty to both counts at the earliest opportunity. I have received a letter from the defendant, expressing his remorse, naivety and ignorance of the seriousness of these offences. Mr So has stressed he has participated in Christian worship services whilst in remand and is determined to turn over a new leaf when he has served this sentence. His parents’ letter I have received today supports his remorse.
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, 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 facts of the case and both counts allow me to take a global approach and add up the drugs of both counts for the purposes of sentencing. There is a total of 1,329.2 grammes of cocaine.
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 1,329.2 grammes of cocaine will attract a starting point of 19 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
I have considered the evidence. There is no real evidence to suggest the defendant was anything other than a storekeeper and courier. Therefore, I find the mathematical starting point of 19 years and 3 months’ imprisonment appropriate in this case.
The fourth and fifth steps require me to consider whether there are any aggravating factors or any exceptional mitigating factors. I see no such factors in this case.
So the defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is entitled to a full one-third discount. I will take a starting point of 19 years and 3 months’ imprisonment and reduce it by one-third. The defendant will be sentenced to 12 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.
With the last step of the six steps in mind, I consider this sentence, although substantial, to be fair, just and balanced in light of the circumstances of the offences as well as the defendant.
Accordingly, for the 1st count, the defendant is sentenced to 12 years and 10 months’ imprisonment. For the 2nd count, the defendant is sentenced to 12 years and 10 months’ imprisonment. I will order the sentences for both counts to be served concurrently. Therefore, the defendant is sentenced to a total of 12 years and 10 months’ imprisonment. Can I ask if the defendant understands his sentence?
ACCUSED: Understood.
