HKSAR V Ho Tak Kwan

Case No.HCCC 140/2010
Court
High Court CFI
Date29 Jul 2010
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC140/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 140 OF 2010

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Ho Tak Kwan  

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

Before: DHCJ Stuart-Moore
Date: 29 July 2010 at 9.37 am
Present: Mr P J Power, SADPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Mr David Rex Boyton, instructed by Messrs Tangs Solicitors, for the Accused
Offence: Mr P J Power, SADPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: On 7 May 2010, the defendant pleaded guilty in the Eastern Magistrates' Court to trafficking in a crystalline solid containing 26.92 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. He was then committed to this court for sentence, and he has confirmed his plea of guilty here.

The facts, shortly described, were that the drugs, known more commonly as “Ice”, were found in the defendant’s possession after he had been asked to get out of the front passenger seat of a vehicle parked outside a block of flats on the Lei Muk Shue Estate in Tsuen Wan.

His explanation for carrying the “Ice” was that he had been offered $500 to deliver it by someone called “Ah Ming”, who had met him that day in a games centre. He was waiting for someone to contact him for the purpose of delivery.

The “Ice” had a retail value of $19,843.

The defendant, aged 33, has a minor conviction several years ago which I shall ignore. He was unemployed at the time of the offence. To his credit, the defendant has pleaded guilty to the offence, and his remorse will be fully reflected in the sentence which must be imposed.

The guidelines in Attorney General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125 at 130 provide that for between 10 and 70 grammes of “Ice”, the sentence should range from 7 to 10 years' imprisonment.

The starting point for sentence which seems to me to be appropriate in all the circumstances, and indeed, as Mr Boyton, in his very realistic address, appeared to agree with, is one of 7½ years' imprisonment. This will be reduced to 5 years' imprisonment to reflect your timely plea of guilty.

So the sentence is 5 years' imprisonment.