HKSAR v. Liang Chun-ho

DCCC102/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 102 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant was convicted of one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs after trial. The quantity of drugs involved was 115.96 grammes of powder containing 65 grammes of ketamine.

2.The defendant has just turned 21.  Excluding the breaches of probation order, he has five previous convictions, one of which was for trafficking in dangerous drugs in 2009 and one was for possession of dangerous drugs in 2010.

3.Counsel submitted that after he was discharged from prison, the defendant became a kitchen apprentice in April last year.  In August last year, he changed his job to work for another restaurant.  He lost his job in November last year.  He got into gambling and was pursued by loan sharks for $100,000.  He then broke up with his girlfriend and tried to commit suicide in early December of last year.  He was given inpatient psychiatric treatment until 23 December.  He was then arrested for the present offence on the very next day.  Counsel submitted that the defendant now wishes to turn over a new leaf, his family is supportive, and he urged the court to be lenient. 

4.This is a very serious case.  The quantity of drugs involved was substantial.  According to the sentencing guidelines laid down in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2008] 3 HKC 323, the appropriate starting point for trafficking in 50 to 300 grammes of ketamine is 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment.

5.The quantity of narcotics in the present case was over 65 grammes.  The defendant has one previous conviction for trafficking in 2009.  He knew of the seriousness of the offence and the consequences.  He is only just 21.  He already has five previous convictions.  He committed his first offence when he was 13 years old.  The courts have bent over backwards to be lenient with him.  He was placed on probation for robbery and theft, but he repeatedly breached that order.  Despite that, the court only extended his PO.  He breached the order again and was sentenced to disciplinary training and the rehabilitation centre in 2007.  Soon after his supervision period in the rehabilitation centre, he committed the first trafficking charge.  He was sentenced to prison.  As soon as he was released, he committed another drug charge.  He has not shown a shred of remorse in the present proceedings.

6.In all the circumstances, I adopt a starting point of 7 years’ imprisonment.  The defendant was convicted after trial. He is not entitled to any discount.  7 years.