HKSAR v. Lim Siu Pun

CACC000082/1997

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1997 No.82
(Criminal)

________________

________________

Coram: Hon. Power, V.-P., Mortimer and Mayo, JJ.A.

Date of hearing: 17 July 1997

Date of judgment: 17 July 1997

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Power, V.-P. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant in this matter faced one charge of trafficking a dangerous drug which was particularized as follows - that he on 24^th July 1996, at the staircase of the ground floor of 256, Sai Yeung Choi Street, Mongkok, unlawfully trafficked in 64.78 grammes of a mixture containing 47.88 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

2. The facts state that the police, having observed him loitering with another male, then stopped and searched him and three plastic bags containing the drugs were found hidden in his underpants. He admitted that he delivered them for a person called Ah Man.

3. The trial judge when sentencing said that the proper starting point was 7 1/2 years. That is in line with the guidelines. He took account that the applicant was only 17 years of age but again, following the guideline case, he felt unable to make any reduction given that this was a drug trafficking case. He said finally he would reduce the sentence to 5 years for plea, a one-third reduction which, again, is in line with the current practice. He then said:

"I then compare 5 years with the District Court's maximum jurisdiction of 7 years and consider whether or not the 2 years' difference gives sufficient credit for the defendant's plea of guilty. In my view it does not, and the sentence needs to be reduced by a further 3 months. Accordingly, the defendant is convicted of the charge of trafficking and is sentence to 4 years, 9 months' imprisonment."

4. The applicant today simply says that his sentence was too heavy. There is nothing in the facts which would suggest that there is any merit in that submission. Indeed, it seems to us that he was fortunate to have been given the additional 3 months credit.

5. The application must be refused.

Representation:

Mr. John Reading (D.P.P.) for the Respondent.

Applicant in person.