HKSAR v. Mohamedi Ijumaa Rashidi and Others

Please refer to CACC189/2013 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.

Case No.HCCC 131/2011

Court

High Court CFI

Date19 Jul 2011

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCCC131/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 131 OF 2011

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

	HKSAR
	v.
	Mohamedi Ijumaa Rashidi	(A1)
	Nganga Faiz Mohamed Abdallah	(A2)
	Mwila Zahra Yakubu	(A3)
-----------------

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary

Date:

19 July 2011 at 10.24 am

Present:

Ms Rosaline Leung, SPP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Jonathan Acton-Bond, instructed by Messrs T C Lau & Co (assigned by DLA), for the 1st Accused
Mr Rupert Spicer, instructed by the Legal Aid Department, for the 2nd Accused
Miss Diane Crebbin, instructed by Messrs Knight & Ho (assigned by DLA), for the 3rd Accused

Offence:

(1) to (3) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

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

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

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

COURT: The three accused, each of you stands convicted of one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. Each of you has pleaded guilty at the Magistrates' Court and has been committed to the High Court for sentence.

The quantity of drugs involved in the 1st accused’s case is 1,440 grammes of a mixture containing 820 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 250 grammes of monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride. The quantity of drugs involved in the 2nd accused’s case is 1,080 grammes of a mixture containing 450 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 310 grammes of monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride. The quantity of drugs involved in the 3rd accused’s case is 1,471.51 grammes of a mixture containing 731.83 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 334.18 grammes of monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride.

Each of you has imported these drugs into Hong Kong from abroad.

All things considered, I adopt a starting point, in the case of the 1st accused, of 22½ years’ imprisonment, enhance it by 2 years, making a total of 24½ years’ imprisonment.

In the 2nd accused’s case, I adopt a starting point of 20½ years’ imprisonment, enhance it by 1½ years’ imprisonment, making a total of 22 years’ imprisonment.

In the case of the 3rd accused, I adopt a starting point of 22 years’ imprisonment, enhance it by 2 years’ imprisonment, making a total of 24 years’ imprisonment.

I have taken into account everything urged in mitigation on behalf of each of you by your counsel. There is really no real mitigation apart from your early plea of guilty, for which I shall give each of you the full one‑third discount.

So in the case of the 1st accused, I shall reduce your sentence from the starting point of 24½ years’ imprisonment to one of 16 years and 4 months’ imprisonment and you will therefore go to prison for 16 years and 4 months.

In the case of the 2nd accused, I shall give you the full one-third discount, thereby reducing the starting point of 22 years’ imprisonment to one of 14 years and 8 months’ imprisonment. You will therefore go to prison for 14 years and 8 months.

In the case of the 3rd accused, giving you the one-third discount, I shall reduce your sentence from 24 years’ imprisonment to one of 16 years’ imprisonment. You will therefore go to prison for 16 years.

Please refer to CACC189/2013 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.