HKSAR v. Chew Chi Bun

DCCC 633/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 633 OF 2012

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Trafficking in a dangerous drug". The dangerous drug involved is heroin.

Summary of Facts

2.About 9:25 am on 9 May 2012, PC 4186 (PW1) saw the defendant entering into a building situated at No.96 Ki Lung Street, Sham Shui Po.  He intercepted the defendant at the 1^st Floor staircase for enquiries.  Upon search, PW1 found in the right front pocket of the defendant's jeans 2 plastic bags containing a total of 100 packets of suspected dangerous drug (collectively "E1").  Under caution, the defendant admitted that E1 contained heroin.  He was helping someone to deliver E1 in return for a reward of $500.

3.In his video recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he met an unknown person at the Methadone Clinic at Yee Kuk Street in the morning on 8 May 2012.  The unknown person asked him to earn some money by delivering drugs.  The defendant agreed and gave his phone number to the unknown person.  About 9:00 am on 9 May 2012, the defendant received a phone call asking him to go to an exit of the Prince Edward MTR Station. There, a 2^nd unknown person handed E1 to him.  The defendant was to go home, repackage E1 into 10 to 20 packets per bag, and then wait for a phone call about leaving the drug at a designated location at Nam Cheong Street.  He was intercepted by the Police on his way home.

4.E1 was later found to contain a total of 15.81 grammes of a mixture containing 12.69 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

Mitigation & Sentence

5.The defendant is now 55 and has 25 conviction records, out of which 1 is drug trafficking and 18 are "simple possession". 

6.Defence lawyer Mr. TSE informed me that the defendant is divorced and resides alone on the 3^rd Floor of the subject building.  He is a long-term drug addict who began consuming heroin in 1977.  Mr. TSE submitted that the defendant's role was only a courier.  He was caught by the Police whilst bringing E1 home.  He committed the present offence as he wanted to earn $500 to feed his drug habit. 

7.The defendant is no doubt a sad case.  He received his first DATC Order for "simple possession" in 1986 and continued his commission of the same offence throughout the 1990s and the 1^st decade in the new millennium.  He also has 1 drug trafficking conviction in 2005, for which he was lucky enough to receive a DATC Order.  It is entirely up to him whether or not he wants to continue with this lifestyle.  The court and the penal system can only do so much.  He most certainly has a choice to be good and it is never too late to turn a new leaf in his life.

8.The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in heroin (see The Queen v LAU Tak-ming & others [1990] 2 HKLR 370).  For 10 to 50 grammes, the sentence ranges from 5 to 8 years' imprisonment.  In this case, the defendant trafficked in a total of 12.69 grammes of heroin.  I adopt a starting point of 5 years.  A one-third discount is given for his guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 40 months.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount.  The sentence I pass is 40 months' imprisonment.