HKSAR v. Chan Ka Ho, Hill

Application against conviction and sentence by the defendant to Court of Appeal dismissed. Please refer to CACC404/2009 dated 26 October 2010

Case No.DCCC 769/2009

Court

District Court

Date10 Nov 2009

Judge—

Case Document

100%

DCCC769/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 769 OF 2009

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

	HKSAR
	v.
	Chan Ka Ho, Hill

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

Before:

H H Judge S. D’Almada Remedios

Date:

10 November 2009 at 3.22 pm

Present:

Mr Paul Stephenson, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Giles Surman, instructed by Messrs Adrian Yeung & Cheng, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant

Offence:

(1) Trafficking in dangerous drugs (販運危險藥物)
(2) Possession of a dangerous drug (管有危險藥物)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1. Defendant, I have two charges to deal with you in sentencing. The first is that of trafficking in “Ice” in the amount of 6.87 grammes and 0.51 grammes of ketamine. That is on 15 May 2009, and the second charge is possession of a dangerous drug on 7 June 2009 in the amount of 0.87 grammes of “Ice”.

2. Mr Surman, your counsel, has mitigated on your behalf. He said certainly it is clear, at least from your record, that you are a drug dependent.

3. He has referred me to the authority in respect of sentencing guidelines on “Ice”, which is Ching Kwok Hung, and has recognised that the band for the amount of “Ice” that you had for trafficking is between 3 to 7 years’ imprisonment.

4. In respect of the charge of trafficking, I convicted you after trial, though I recognise and give you credit for the fact that you admitted the whole of the prosecution case. The issue in this case was whether you had the drugs for your own consumption or was it for trafficking.

5. As regards the ketamine involved in Charge 1, I shall not take that amount into account when sentencing as I consider it to be a very small, nominal amount.

6. Taking into account the amount of “Ice” involved, I consider an appropriate sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment.

7. As for the second charge of possession, you have four previous convictions for possession, your last conviction being possession, to which you were sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.

8. This is now your fifth conviction for possession. I consider an immediate term of imprisonment to be appropriate, and I take the term of 12 months’ imprisonment. The starting point is 12 months but I give you full reduction for your plea of guilty, so that shall be reduced to 8 months’ imprisonment.

9. I take into account the principle of totality when sentencing you for these two charges and I consider that one month of Charge 2 is to run consecutive to Charge 1 as this offence was committed after you were arrested for the first offence and it is a separate and distinct offence.

10. In the circumstances, you are sentenced to 5 years and 1 month imprisonment. The remainder of Charge 2 runs concurrent to Charge 1.

	(S. D'Almada Remedios)
	District Judge

Application against conviction and sentence by the defendant to Court of Appeal dismissed. Please refer to CACC404/2009 dated 26 October 2010