Case Document

100%

DCCC1079/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1079 OF 2010

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

	HKSAR
	v.
	Cheung Kei Ying
----------------------

Before:

H H Judge Anthea Pang

Date:

17 November 2010 at 10.33 am

Present:

Ms Monica Chan, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Ms Catherine Yu, of Messrs C. Yu & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant

Offence:

Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The Defendant pleaded 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.

2.The facts admitted by the Defendant and which formed the basis of the charge are relatively simple. In the small hours of 2 June 2010, while the police were patrolling in the area of Marble Road, North Point, they saw the Defendant and another male sitting inside a car which was parked outside No. 28, Marble Road. As both the Defendant and the male were looking nervous at the time, the police conducted a search on them. During the search, the Defendant took out 9 bags of ketamine and handed them to the police. The drug was later found to be a total of 12.24 grammes of a powder containing 9.31 grammes of ketamine. Under caution and during a subsequent video-recorded interview, the Defendant admitted that the ketamine belonged to her and that she was keeping and delivering the drug for the male in the car. The estimated street value of the drug was about HK$1,900.

3.The Defendant was born on 1 May 1994 and is now 16 years of age. She received a police superintendent’s warning in March 2009 for criminal intimidation but she has never been convicted by the court. The Defendant is the younger of the 2 children in the family. She was educated up to Form 4 but because of her poor academic performance and her mingling with dubious peers, she stopped schooling. At the time of the commission of the offence, she had left home to stay with her then boy-friend, who was the male inside the car when the Defendant was arrested.

4.In mitigation, it was said that the Defendant has a very supportive family and she only turned wayward because of bad peer influence. She has, however, learnt a bitter lesson and is truly remorseful. She made frank admissions to the police and pleaded guilty to the charge.

5.I adjourned sentence to today in order to obtain a background report and a training centre report which I now have. According to the reports, the Defendant is a playful girl and she mingled with her dubious peers to hang around in shopping centres. She is rebellious and often quarreled with her father which eventually led her to stay away from home. However, it was said that the Defendant now realizes that she has a caring family and that her ex-boyfriend was merely trying to take advantage of her. All in all, it is considered that she is suitable for detention in a Training Centre as the disciplinary training would be conducive to helping her to reform her character and to rehabilitate and become a law-abiding person.

6.The Court has said time and again that there is a need for deterrence when dealing with offences like trafficking in a dangerous drug and that age carries little weight in mitigation.

7.In Wong Chun Cheong and HKSAR (2001) 4 HKCFAR 12, the Court of Final Appeal examined the circumstances under which a training centre order is to be imposed and what the relevant considerations are.

8.The guidelines for trafficking in ketamine were laid down in SJ V Hii Siew Cheng ＆Another [2009] 1 HKLRD 1. In the present case, for the 9.31 grammes of ketamine involved, I consider a starting point of 45 months to be appropriate. If a term of imprisonment were to be imposed, the Defendant would, after getting her one-third reduction for the plea, need to serve a term of 30 months.

9.However, having considered the facts of this case, the matters urged upon me in mitigation, and the background of the Defendant, I am of the view that it is in the interest of the community to give a chance to the Defendant to reform herself and for her to turn over a new leaf. I agree that a period of disciplinary training coupled with statutory supervision is beneficial to the Defendant. Such training and supervision would not be available if a term of imprisonment were to be imposed.

10.After careful consideration, I take the view that a training centre order is the most appropriate method to deal with the Defendant. I therefore make a training centre order in respect of the charge to which the Defendant has pleaded guilty.