CRIMINAL CASE NO. 210 OF 2010
COURT: The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.
The defendant was intercepted by police officers at the corridor on the 2nd floor of a building. A total of 33 packets of drugs were found concealed inside his underpants. HK$27,661 was found on him. He told officers, under caution, that he purchased the drugs the day before and he had been jobless for a year and he would sell some of the drugs to his friends to make some profit. He further said, at the video interview, that he was there to look for friends to play videogames and if they should need the drugs, he would sell some to them and he would also find a place to consume drugs himself.
Upon analysis, the drugs were found to be 236.13 grammes of a powder containing 201.67 grammes of ketamine. The market value of the drugs seized was about HK$28,000.
The defendant has two previous convictions, one in 2001 and the other in 2004; both are for possession of dangerous drugs. He has been sentenced to a fine and a probation order respectively.
By way of mitigation, counsel for the defendant submitted that half of the drugs in question were for the defendant’s own consumption, and whilst he borrowed money and used $11,000 to purchase the drugs, his financial means and addiction could be met by trafficking part of the drugs. Counsel also told the court that the defendant was an acknowledged drug addict and would consume about 4 to 5 grammes of ketamine a day. It is also stressed that no paraphernalia relating to trafficking were found on the defendant’s person or at his residence and the drugs were already packaged in that way when purchased.
The prosecution does not accept the defendant’s contention that part of the drugs seized were for his own consumption.
In sentencing the defendant, I have considered his guilty plea, mitigation forwarded by counsel on his behalf, the existing tariff for trafficking ketamine, I have also perused a letter in mitigation written by the defendant’s father on his behalf.
For trafficking in narcotics of ketamine between 50 and 300 grammes, the tariff is one between 6 and 9 years’ imprisonment. Now that the defendant contends that a significant portion of the drugs seized were for his own consumption, I have considered the following factors in accordance with the case of Wong Suet Hau.
(1) Total weight of the mixture was 236.13 grammes, containing 201.67 grammes. The market value was about $28,000. The defendant claimed that the amount of money he used to purchase these drugs was $11,000 and this was the balance of money he had used up from the $17,000 he claimed to have borrowed from a finance institution.
(2) The drugs were wrapped in three separate parcels: (a) one large transparent plastic packet containing five bags of drugs with 108.45 grammes of ketamine; (b) three transparent plastic packets containing 25 bags of drugs, 58.63 grammes of ketamine; and (c) one large transparent plastic bag containing three plastic bags of drugs, 34.59 grammes of ketamine.
(3) The defendant was intercepted at a residential building in the same district as his own residential address. He admitted that he was there to find some friends and that if they needed, he would sell some drugs to them.
(4) No paraphernalia associated with either the consumption or trafficking of drugs were found on his person or at his residence.
(5) The defendant has two previous records of possession of drugs and claimed to be still so addicted.
(6) Cash of $27,000-odd was seized from the defendant at the time of the arrest.
Whilst it is not uncommon for drug addicts to feed their own consumption by trafficking and that this defendant might consume a small amount from the drugs seized in question, from the above facts, I do not accept that a significant portion of the drugs, which warrants an extra adjustment to sentence, were for his own consumption.
For the amount of narcotics in the present case, I adopt a starting point of 7 years and 9 months’ imprisonment. I shall give him the full one-third discount for his guilty plea.
He is sentenced to 62 months’ imprisonment - 5 years and 2 months - and that is the sentence I pass.