HKSAR v. Luu Xuan-tu

DCCC837/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 837 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Trafficking in a dangerous drug". The dangerous drug involved is heroin.

2.This case is a typical "stop and search" incident. About 11:45 am on 14 June 2010, the defendant was stopped by police officers patrolling on Tung Chau Street, Sham Shui Po. Upon search, a total of 80 packets of suspected dangerous drug were found in the left front pocket of his jeans. Under caution, the defendant admitted that the packets contained "white powder" and that they were for his own consumption. A Government Chemist confirmed that the 80 packets contained a total of 15.89 grammes of a mixture containing 4.77 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The defendant now admits that he possessed the 80 packets of heroin for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

3.The defendant is now 38 years old. He has 5 previous convictions, which include 1 offence of "Trafficking" and 2 offences of "Simple Possession". His last conviction took place in August 2005, for which he was sentenced to 20 months imprisonment.

4.Defence lawyer Ms. HO submitted that the defendant has quitted his drug habit for quite some time. However, his mother passed away in 2009; the defendant felt lost and indulged himself in drugs again. Ms. HO further submitted that the defendant lost his job in February; he therefore could not finance his drug habit. As a result, he began trafficking to earn some money to feed his addiction.

5.The loss of a close family member is not an excuse for drug abuse. The lack of financial ability is most definitely not an excuse for trafficking in drugs. A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that "drug trafficking" is a serious crime and that drug traffickers would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment.

6.The sentencing tariff for trafficking in heroin is laid down in The Queen v LAU Tak-ming & others [1990] 2 HKLR 370. For up to 10 grammes, the sentence ranges from 2 to 5 years. A total of 4.77 grammes of heroin are involved in this case. Hence, I adopt a starting point of 3.5 years. One-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 28 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount. The sentence I impose is therefore 2 years and 4 months.