HKSAR v. Lam Lee Ming

DCCC43/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 43 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. In sentencing, I have taken into account the whole circumstances of the case, including its nature and facts, in particular, the nature and quantity of the dangerous drugs involved, background of the defendant, mitigation put forward on his behalf, and have had regard to sentencing precedent.

2.The facts of the case are simple. The defendant was the owner of a snack shop. On 17 November last year, there was a raid by the police at his shop. 11 bags of 35.78 grammes of a powder containing 20.81 grammes of ketamine were found in his shop. An electronic scale, a plastic spoon and a pile of resealable plastic bags were also found.

3.Under caution, the defendant admitted to have bought the dangerous drugs for the purpose of reselling it for a profit.

4.The defendant is a first-time offender. He is 20 years of age, and is living with his parents and younger sister at the time of the arrest. Both parents work in a restaurant. His younger sister is still looking for a job. Defendant has only finished Form 3 education. He had also worked in a restaurant before, earning about seven to eight thousand dollars per month. Having worked for about two and a half years, due to long hours of work, he was exhausted. Under bad influence of friends, he started to consume ketamine.

5.About a month before the arrest, he started the business of his snack shop. The business was not good. He was hard-pressed financially both for his drug need and for the costs of running the business. I was told that out of stupidity, the defendant bought the drugs, intended to make some money.

6.I was told that the defendant is now full of remorse. This I accept, and I believe the defendant is determined to turn over a new leaf. I also accept that the family is in support of him.

7.According to the sentencing guideline in the case of SJ v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, the tariff for a conviction after trial of trafficking in 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine is 4 to 6 years of imprisonment. In all the circumstances, I do not consider there exist strong reasons not to follow the tariff suggested in that case.

8.Ketamine has been shown to be a prevalent drug in Hong Kong. The harm to individuals and the community as a whole is tremendous. I was told that the defendant is an abuser of the drug and has no previous conviction of any kind. Having regard to the remarks in Hii Siew Cheng, I am of the view that an immediate custodial sentence is warranted, and a starting point of 4 and a half years is appropriate. I am satisfied that he is remorseful. He is entitled to a one-third discount. In all the circumstances, I consider that this is the extent of discount he is entitled to.

9.Although the defendant is addicted to drugs, it is not appropriate to consider a sentence of DATC in view of the seriousness of the offence. Besides, there are suitable and abundant facilities in the CSD institutions for the defendant to get rid of the vice habit.

10.Based on the matters aforesaid, I sentence the defendant to 3 years’ imprisonment. I hope that the defendant having served his sentence will turn over a new leaf.