HKSAR v. Pham Ngoc Hoang and Others

HCCC 439/2025

[2026] HKCFI 6047

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 439 OF 2025

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: D1, D2 have pleaded guilty to two counts of cultivation of cannabis plants, whereas D3 has pleaded guilty to three counts of the same, contrary to section 9(1) and (5) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.  They are committed to this court for sentence.

In the afternoon on 11 April 2023, police officers mounted anti-narcotic operations at (i) Unit H, 25th Floor, Block 1 (“L1”), (ii) Unit A, 27th Floor, Block 2 (“L2”), and (iii) Unit L, 2nd Floor, Block 1 (“L3”) of one industrial building at Kwai Chung.

D2 was stopped by police officers when he was leaving L1.  After entering L1, D1 and D3 were found inside.

Upon further searches of all three premises, 266 pots of cannabis plants with a total weight of 38.108 kilogrammes were found inside L1, 333 pots of cannabis plants with a total weight of 57.509 kilogrammes were found in L2, 153 pots of cannabis plants with a total weight of 0.172 kilogrammes were found in L3.  Pots, fertiliser, lamps and plant equipment for the cultivation of cannabis were also seized by police officers.

The annual yields of cannabis found in L1 to L3 were found to be 29.24 kilogrammes, 36.61 kilogrammes and 16.82 kilogrammes respectively.

D1 is now 39, married with two daughters in Vietnam.  He is a Form 8 holder.  According to D1, he was given $6,000 to look after all those plants.

D2 is now 54, divorced with three children.  He is also a Form 8 holder.  A fellow countryman introduced him to this job for looking after plants in order for him to make a little bit of money to help the family back in Vietnam.

D3 is now 52, married.  He is a Hong Kong resident.  As he was facing financial difficulty, he therefore took up the job of looking after the plants after the introduction by his fellow countryman too.

Without any evidence pointing to otherwise, all three defendants would be treated as no more than manual workers responsible for looking after the plants in question.  I, however, note that D3 is in a slightly different position, namely at the time, he was sort of experimenting the cultivation of cannabis plants himself.  However, the operation was not extensive and huge.

Given the circumstances of the case, namely the relatively close positions, locations of the three premises, the seizures of the cannabis plants, and the arrest of the three defendants, the charges the defendants faced can be treated as one transaction.

The total estimated annual yield of cannabis for the first two counts is one of 65.85 kilogrammes.  Applying the sentencing guideline in Nguyen Thang Loi, a notional starting point of 7 years and 5 months will be adopted.  D1 and D2 both are Form 8 holders, an additional 7 months will be imposed, thus making a starting point of 8 years’ imprisonment.

Both D1 and D2 will be given the full one-third discount for their earliest pleas.  For the two counts of cultivation of cannabis plants D1 and D2 stand convicted, they are sentenced to 64 months’ imprisonment on each count to run concurrently with each other.

For D3, the notional starting point will be set at 8 years’ imprisonment, given the extra count to which he pleaded guilty.  Although the operation at the material time was not huge or extensive, on the other hand, the annual yield was estimated to be 16.82 kilogrammes.  Again, the operation at the three premises can be viewed as one.  A full one-third discount will be given for his earliest plea.

As such, for the three counts of cultivation of cannabis plants D3 stands convicted, he is sentenced to 64 months’ imprisonment on each count to run concurrently with each other.