HKSAR v. Cheung Share Yeung

Read the full judgment text of DCCC 48/2011 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 22 February 2011.

1. The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in 42.13 grammes of a mixture containing 26.19 grammes of heroin and 100 tablets containing 1.26 grammes of midazolam, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.

Cites 1 case

Case No.DCCC 48/2011
Court
District Court
Date22 Feb 2011
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

DCCC 48/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 48 OF 2011

____________

  HKSAR  
  v  
  CHEUNG SHARE-YEUNG  
____________
Before: Deputy District Judge Dufton
Date: 22 February 2011
Present: Mr Winston Chan, Senior Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
Mr Eddie Law of Messrs Eddie P.L. Law & Co assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
Offences: Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in 42.13 grammes of a mixture containing 26.19 grammes of heroin and 100 tablets containing 1.26 grammes of midazolam, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.

2.In summary in the morning of the 1st December last year the police intercepted the defendant outside the refuse collection point in Hing Ming Estate in Chai Wan. Upon search the police found from the defendant’s bag two plastic bags containing the heroin and one plastic bag containing the midazolam.  Under caution the defendant said he owed money therefore he was helping to deliver the heroin for a reward of $500. 

3.In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said by Mr Law, together with the letter submitted by the defendant asking for leniency so he can look after his elderly mother.   

4.In R v LAU Tak-ming[1990] 2 HKLR 370 the Court of Appeal laid down guidelines for trafficking in heroin.  The court said that the sentence upon conviction after trial where the quantity of narcotic is between 10 and 50 grammes falls within the range of 5-8 years.  

5.The defendant has a long criminal record including two similar convictions for trafficking in dangerous drugs in 2002 and 2008 when he received sentences of 3 years and 8 months and 1 year and 4 months imprisonment respectively, which sentences have clearly had no deterrent effect on the defendant as he continues to traffic in dangerous drugs.

6.I am satisfied in the circumstances of the case the proper starting point after trial for 26.19 grammes of heroin is 6 years and 6 months imprisonment.  Trafficking in midazolam is far less serious than trafficking in heroin.  I am satisfied that the 100 tablets containing 1.26 grammes of midazolam should not increase the starting point (see for example HKSAR v Amnuaychoke Nopporn CACC 441/2001). 

7.Giving the defendant full credit for his plea of guilty he is sentenced to 4 years and 4 months imprisonment.

(D. J. DUFTON)
DEPUTY DISTRICT JUDGE