HKSAR v. Tang Sze Woo

HCMA000041/2003

HCMA41/2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.41 OF 2003

(ON APPEAL FROM WSCC 1613 OF 2002)

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

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

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge McMahon in Court

Date of Hearing: 24 February 2003

Date of Judgment: 24 February 2003

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1.This is an appeal against sentence.

2.The appellant was convicted on his own plea possession of 0.15 grammes of heroin in five packets, contrary to sections 8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

3.The facts of the case were that the appellant have been seen acting suspiciously in Western District by a police patrol. He had been stopped and searched and the drugs, the subject matter of the charge, had been found in his shirt. The appellant said the drugs were for his own consumption. The magistrate took a starting point of 12 months' imprisonment and reduce that to eight months' imprisonment on the basis that the appellant had pleaded guilty.

4.The sentencing magistrate, before passing sentence, obtained a report as to the appellant's suitability for a Drug Addition Treatment Centre order. In that regard, the magistrate said in his Reasons for Sentence :

"The defendant admitted 55 previous convictions the vast majority of which were drug related (his criminal record refers). The Drug Addition Treatment Centre Report confirmed the defendant's drug dependence but not surprisingly given his criminal record did not recommend the imposition of a Drug Addition Treatment Centre order. ..."

The magistrate then concluded that a custodial sentence was appropriate. As I say he took as his starting point 12 months' imprisonment. That, as the magistrate remarked, was a starting point which had been approved in appeals involving similar facts or circumstances : HKSAR v. Lai Siu Ming, HCMA238/199, HKSAR v. Wong Yuen Shing, HCMA259/1999 and R. v. Lam Wai Ping, HCMA239 and 240/1997.

5.In my view, the magistrate's reasoning cannot be faulted. The sentence is appropriate and cannot be said to be too severe. The appeal against sentence is dismissed.

Representation:

Ms Polly Wan, SGC of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Appellant in person