HKSAR v. Kwan Wing Wai

DCCC679/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 679 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

2.At around the 11.00 pm on 4 May 2010, a team of police officers from the District Special Duty Squad were patrolling outside Hung Cheuk Lau, Kwon Tong Garden Estate, Kwon Tong (“the Building”), and saw the Defendant coming out of a taxi with another person.

3.Their behaviour was described by officers as suspicious.  The officers then followed them into the Building and revealed to them their police identities at the fifth floor lift lobby of the Building.

4.The Defendant was searched and a re-sealable plastic bag containing a powder was found in the right rear pocket of his jeans. 

5.The other person, a 15-year-old boy, was also searched but no illegal substance was found on him.

6.The Defendant was then arrested.  He had cash to the value of $100 on him at the time of his arrest.  The Defendant stated under caution, “Ah Sir, I was just greedy and wanted to earn some money.  I know I am wrong and it has nothing to do with my friend.”

7.In the subsequent video-recorded interview, the Defendant admitted that he agreed to help a man he met earlier that day to deliver the bag of ketamine and to deposit it underneath a waste trolley on the fifth floor of the Building for a reward of $100.

8.He admitted to knowing that he was trafficking dangerous drug, and that the $100 found on him was the reward he received from the man.  He stated that his 15-year-old friend knew nothing about the dangerous drug.

9.Government Chemist confirmed that the plastic bag seized from the Defendant contains 13.17 grammes of a powder containing 8.55 grammes of ketamine.  The estimated street value of the dangerous drug is HK$1,726.

10.The Defendant is 17 years of age now, and he was also of the same age when he committed the offence.  He has a clear record.  He came to Hong Kong from the Mainland at the age of 11.  His father had died, and he is living with his mother and sister.

11.According to Mr Ting, solicitor for the Defendant, the Defendant could not fully integrate into the Hong Kong community.  He performed poorly at school and he only have temporary jobs after leaving school.  Further, he mixed with some bad peers which led to the commission of the present offence.

12.According to Mr Ting, the Defendant has felt a strong sense of regret.  The Defendant also accepts that it was only a stupid move on his part as he only received $100 for the commission of this offence.

13.Trafficking in ketamine is a very serious offence.  In fact, there is a widespread problem of drug abuse amongst young persons in Hong Kong, and the court must send a clear and loud message to the community that such kind of offence will not be tolerated by the court.

14.I accept that the Defendant might just be a courier and he only received $100 as reward for his work.  However, without his participation, the end-user would not be able to get the drugs concerned.

15.I note that the Defendant is only a young man, aged 17.  Mr Ting, in his submission, submits that the court should call for at least a Training Centre Report.  If the court were to sentence him to the Training Centre, he would have to stay there for some time and it would also provide an opportunity of rehabilitation for the Defendant.

16.However for such kind of offence, even for a young person with a clear record, the Defendant cannot expect the court to treat him in a lenient manner.  In my judgement, a Training Centre Order cannot reflect the gravity of the offence, and immediate custodial sentence is the only option.  In such circumstances, I do not accept that it is necessary to call for a report before sentencing.

17.Adopting the guideline of trafficking in ketmine as laid down in the case of the Secretary of Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, trafficking in ketamine in the amount of 1 gramme to 10 grammes will attract a sentence in the region of 2 to 4 years’ imprisonment.  As 8.55 grammes of ketamine was involved in the present case, I adopt a starting point of 3½ years’ imprisonment.  Giving the Defendant one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is reduced to 2 years and 4 months’ imprisonment and this is the sentence I impose in the present case.