HKSAR v. Chan Keung Kwan

DCCC91/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 91 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 39.56 grammes of a mixture containing 31.52 grammes of heroin hydrochloride, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

2.In summary, on the evening of 23 November 2011, police officers were conducting an anti-dangerous drugs operation.  They intercepted the defendant who was sitting inside the restaurant in Mongkok. Upon search, altogether 180 packets of heroin were found from the bag that the defendant was carrying. 

3.Under caution, the defendant admitted that he had no money and therefore delivered the drugs for others.  The drugs found on the defendant contained a total of 39.56 grammes of a mixture containing 31.52 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.  The estimated street value is $24,869.28. 

4.The defendant is aged 40, single, living with his girlfriend.  His family background is unremarkable.  He was previously a transportation worker on casual basis before he committed the present offence.  He has eight previous convictions, four of which are for possession of dangerous drugs. The last conviction was in 2003.

Mitigation

5.The defendant’s solicitor tells the court that the defendant was in financial difficulty and was unable to pay his rent.  He therefore agreed to deliver the drugs for a person called Ah Kwok, who promised to pay $500 to the defendant as a reward.  The defendant’s solicitor refers me to a Court of Appeal decision (CACC163/1997) for my consideration of the appropriate starting point in this case.  In that case, the Court of Appeal said 6½ years was an entirely proper starting point.  The narcotic in that case of heroin was 29.72 grammes. 

6.In Lau Tak Ming, the Court of Appeal laid down guideline for trafficking in heroin for quantity between 10 and 50 grammes. The range of imprisonment falls between 5 and 8 years upon conviction after trial.  The quantity of narcotic in this case is 31.52 grammes.  Although the quantity of heroin in this case is slightly more than the narcotic in the case cited by the defendant’s solicitor, I am of the view that, the proper starting point in the present case should be the same (i.e. 6½ years).

7.As I indicated, I would not treat the defendant as a persistent offender and applied the principle in Chan Pui Chi.  He has only a few convictions for possession of drugs.  The large number of packets involved in this case is not treated as an aggravating factor either.

8.On the other hand, the defendant’s financial difficulty cannot be a factor for the court to reduce the sentence.  The only mitigating factor in this case is the defendant’s plea of guilty for which he will get full credit and one-third reduction of the sentence.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 52 months (i.e. 4 years and 4 months’ imprisonment).