HKSAR v. Yeung Sau Lin

DCCC1303/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1303 OF 2009

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.

2.You have admitted that on 18 September at the rear lane, Nos. 118-120 Austin Road, you had unlawfully trafficked in 92.46 grammes of a powder containing 44.64 grammes of ketamine, 35 tablets containing a total of 0.24 grammes of nimetazepam and 35 tablets containing a total of 2.38 grammes of 3,4‑methylenedioxymethamphetamine. 

3.These drugs were found upon your person by a police officer at about 12.30 am and were found from your handbag.  The ketamine was found to be contained in 29 plastic bags.

4.After arresting you for trafficking in dangerous drugs, you stated that this was your first time to deliver ketamine and asked for a chance.

5.Later that morning at about 1.30 am they escorted you back to your home in Sham Shui Po, the subject of the 2nd charge. The 2nd charge is exactly the same as the 1st charge, that is for trafficking in dangerous drugs.

6.Upon search of your house, they found more dangerous drugs and they were 44.21 grammes of a powder containing 16.14 grammes of ketamine.  Those were contained in two plastic bags - and a further 150 tablets containing 1.02 grammes of nimetazepam and 13 tablets containing a total of 0.84 grammes of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine.

7.Subsequently, in a video recorded interview at about 5.30 am that day, you told the police that you had bought the drugs from an unknown male whom you came across in a pub.  You had spent several thousands for purchasing the drugs and collected the drugs in the Sham Shui Po area.  You were going to sell the ketamine, MDMA and the “Five Chai” to your friends for $80 and $50 respectively.

8.Your counsel, Mr Ng, has mitigated fully and thoroughly on your behalf today.  I have taken into account all that he has had to say when considering the sentence passed upon you.  You are 43 years of age and of clear record.  This is your first offence. 

9.I have also had read to me letters in support of mitigation written by yourself, your mother, your 14-year-old son, your brothers and sisters, and some legislative councillors.  They have all shown great support to you and love to you and have urged this court to pass a lenient sentence. 

10.As for yourself, you realise your wrongdoing, you are very remorseful for what you have done.  You will, after you have served your term of imprisonment, go back to work and look after your family and son.

11.It appears, very sadly, that the reason why as a first offender you have committed this offence is because of the break up of your marriage.  Unfortunately, you became sad and depressed and took to drinking and, having taken to drinking, at the pubs you met some undesirable dubious characters who then introduced you to drugs and then from that led to the commission of this offence.

12.Of course, as Mr Ng rightly points out, trafficking in dangerous drugs is a very serious offence.  There are guidelines which the Court of Appeal have set down to which courts must follow when a certain amount of drugs are found to be for trafficking. 

13.As Mr Ng has rightly pointed out, the amount of drugs you had for trafficking in ketamine was 60.78 grammes, and for this amount of ketamine, it falls within the category of 50 to 300 grammes in the guideline case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng, of which the tariff after trial is one between 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment. 

14.Of course, the greatest mitigating factor in this case for you is your plea of guilty.  You have saved the court time, you have co-operated with the police.  You are remorseful for your offence, and you shall therefore receive the one-third discount.

15.I take into account what Mr Ng has said, that the other amount of drugs are nominal in value and bear in mind of in these circumstances the ketamine far outweighs the smaller amount of drugs.  I sentence you on the basis of the ketamine alone.

16.I have considered the principle of totality. Given the total amount of drugs of 60.78 grammes, I would have taken a starting point of 6 years’ imprisonment had I convicted you after trial.  Giving you credit for your plea of guilty, that term shall be reduced to 4 years’ imprisonment, and that shall be the sentence you will serve.  However, I will have to sentence you individually for each offence.

17.For Charge 1, that would be a starting point of 6 years' imprisonment reduced to 4 years.

18.For Charge 2, that would be a starting point of 4 years' imprisonment and reduced to 2 years 8 months’ imprisonment. Charge 2 will run concurrent to Charge 1, which will still make the total term of 4 years imprisonment.