HKSAR v. Tang Pik Hung
|
DCCC499/2011 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 499 OF 2011 ----------------------
----------------------
-------------------------- Reasons for Sentence -------------------------- 1.The defendant was convicted upon his own guilty plea of one charge of possession of a dangerous drug. 2.In sentencing I have taken into account the whole circumstances of the case, including the nature and facts, in particular, the nature and quantity of dangerous drug concerned, background of the defendant, information and recommendation in the DATC report and mitigation put forward on his behalf. 3.The facts of the case are straightforward. Upon a stop and search on the street the defendant was found in possession of the dangerous drug as set out in the charge. Under caution, the defendant said he had purchased the dangerous drug from a friend at $7,800 for his own consumption. 4.The dangerous drug the defendant possessed was 11.48 grammes of a solid containing 8.36 grammes of cocaine and 0.27 grammes of a powder containing 0.22 grammes of cocaine. The estimated street value of the dangerous drug was about $12,700. 5.The defendant is 27 years of age. He is not a first-time offender. On eight previous occasions he had been convicted, most of them were theft-related. In May 2010, he was convicted of possession of dangerous drug and sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment. 6.I was told that he had received some education at secondary level and had worked as a stock keeper and delivery worker. He lived with his parents and his son, his wife is living in the Mainland. 7.In mitigation, I was told that the defendant is now determined to get rid of the drug habit and turn over a new leaf. The defendant himself wrote a letter to the court stating the same. The defence also produced a letter from two sisters of the defendant, saying that they would give support to the defendant in his reform. 8.Learned counsel for the defence urged me to take into account that the son of the defendant is only 10 years old and the defendant asked for a lenient sentence so that he can look after his son as soon as possible. 9.It is stated in a DATC report that the defendant started to abuse ketamine in 2007 and cocaine in 2008. However, based on medical examination, clinical observation and facts available, in particular that by now the defendant has been remanded for about ½ year, the doctor is of the opinion that the defendant is not a drug-dependant. He is therefore not considered to be suitable for admission to a DATC for treatment. 10.I see no reason not to accept this opinion. Although drug abuse is the major problem of the defendant, at the present stage it is inappropriate to sent him to DATC. 11.The DATC report gives detailed background information of the defendant, which I do not intend to recite here. In sentencing, I take into account the information contained in the report. 12.In all the circumstance it is my judgement that an imprisonment term is appropriate. 13.Having taken into account the latent risk which I found to be not unsubstantial, I consider a starting point of 21 months is appropriate. The defendant pleaded guilty, he is entitled to a one-third discount. Having considered the whole of the relevant circumstances, I am of the view that this is the extent of discount the defendant is entitled to in this case. 14.I appreciate that the custodial sentence will have an adverse effect on the little boy of the family. However, the welfare of the boy is what the defendant should have considered all along. 15.By reason of the matters aforesaid, I sentence the defendant to 14 months’ imprisonment.
|