The Queen v. Lee Sheung Shing

HCMA000663A/1988

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 663 OF 1988

_______________

BETWEEN

_______________

Coram: Hon. Mr. Justice Barnes in Court

Date of Hearing: 2nd November 1988

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 2nd November 1988

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. The Appellant was remanded by me on the 20th October 1988 until today to enable a report to be submitted regarding his suitability for detention in a drug addiction treatment centre.

2. I now have that report and it is to the effect that he is not suitable for admision, the reason being that the meidcal officer who observed and examined him during the period of remand is of the opinion that he is no longer a drug dependent.

3. The background report submitted in respect of him shows that he has been a drug addict of long standing and that he was previously sentenced to detention in a drug addiction treatment centre. As a result of that sentence he is a person in respect of whom Section 6(a) of the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre's ordinance is applicable. That Section provides as follows.

"If a person in respect of whom a detention order is in force, is sentenced to imprisonment (a) for a term of 9 months or less, the detention order shall be suspended until the expiration of his term of imprisbnment; (b) for a term of more than 9 months, the first mentioned detention order shall cease to have effect."

4. A sentence of imprisonment for 9 months is the usual sentence when a person charged with possession for the purposes of unlawful trafficking is convicted of the lesser offence of simple possession. In this case the Appellant has been repared from the beginning to plead guilty to an offence of simple possession. He, therefore, qualifies for 4 discount but his Counsel, on his behalf. urges me not to allow a discount because of Section 6(a) would increase his period of detention beyond 9 months.

5. As the report before me shows that he is no longer drug dependent, it does not seem to be necessary for him to continue to be subject to the detention order which is still extant. For practical reasons, therefore, I will order that he serves a sentence of unusual length. I order that he be sentenced to imprisonment for 9 months and 1 day.

Representation:

Miss Catherine Fung, C.C. for Crown.

Mr. Dennis Law (D.L.A.) for Appellant.