HKSAR v. Chang Che Wei

Please refer to CACC114/2011 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.
Case No.HCCC 228/2010
Court
High Court CFI
Date02 Mar 2011
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC228/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 228 OF 2010

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Chang Che-wei (A2)  

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

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice V Bokhary

Date:

2 March 2011 at 10.32 am

Present:

Mr Laurence Poots, counsel-on-fiat, instructed by the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Christopher Wong, instructed by Messrs Tang & Lee (assigned by DLA), for the 2nd Accused

Offence:

Conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug
(串謀販運危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: Chang Che-wei, you have been convicted of conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug. The dangerous drugs brought to Hong Kong from the Mainland pursuant to this conspiracy consisted of 138.70 kilograms of powder containing 116.36 kilograms of ketamine. The maximum penalty for trafficking in a dangerous drug is life imprisonment. So is the maximum penalty for conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug.

Under the established sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine, the sentence for trafficking anything over 1,000 grammes is 14 years upwards. That is before enhancement for the fact that the dangerous drugs were brought into Hong Kong. In the present case, the dangerous drugs concerned were brought into Hong Kong from the Mainland. I should and do take that into consideration.

In the present case, the quantity of ketamine involved is massive. There is no specific mitigation of any weight in your favour. I have considered everything said on your behalf by your counsel.

All things considered, I sentence you to 22 years’ imprisonment. You will therefore go to prison for 22 years.

Please refer to CACC114/2011 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.

Related Cases
Ranked by citation overlap · cases that cite each other appear first
Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case