The Queen v. Chan Hoi-wing
|
CACC000596A/1996
----------------- Coram: Bokhary, Mortimer and Mayo JJA in Court Date of Judgment: 26 March 1997 ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- Mortimer JA (giving the judgment of the Court): 1. On 12 March 1997 we allowed the appellant's appeal against her conviction for trafficking. That conviction was on 14th October 1996 and concerned a quantity of 30.18 grammes of "ice". We substituted a conviction of simple possession about which there had never been any dispute. The sentence passed for trafficking consequently was quashed. 2. The only other matter relating to sentence that we should mention is that on 3 February 1997 she appeared before the Magistrate's Court for an associated offence of the possession of equipment and apparatus fitting and intended for the injection or use of dangerous drugs. For that she was sentenced to 3 months imprisonment concurrent. Her release date for that would be on 3 April next, that is in about one week's time. 3. We now must consider the appropriate sentence for the appellant's simple possession of 30.18 grammes of "ice". We called for a report from the Commissioner of Correctional Services as to her suitability for admission to a Drug Addiction Centre, as we must if we are considering a custodial sentence. Having regard to the time she has already been in custody, it is not surprising that the report indicates that she is no longer addicted and therefore not suitable for sending to a Drug Addiction Centre. In those circumstances we turn to the appropriate sentence. 4. The applicant is 22 years of age. She has a daughter now nearly 1 year of age, being cared for by her parents. Her cohabitee and the father of that girl is presently serving 9 years for an offence of trafficking. The applicant was unemployed at the time of this offence. 5. The most important aspect of the offence is the latent risk of some of this quantity of drugs falling into the hands of others. Taking that into account, the appropriate starting point is 3 years imprisonment. Having regard to the fact that she always admitted that she was in possession, that sentence will be reduced to 2 years imprisonment. This is the sentence we substitute for the original sentence of 5 years.
Representation: Mr H.Y. Wong (DLA) for Applicant Mr D.G. Saw (SACP) (Crown Prosecutor) for Crown/Respondent |