HKSAR v. Balaneg Dionisia Ligligen

DCCC731/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 731 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to three charges, being Charges 2, 3 and 4 on the indictment, the 2nd charge being one of trafficking in 5.46 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 5.29 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134, laws of Hong Kong; the 3rd being a charge of possession of dangerous drugs, being 0.89 grammes of a mixture of plant materials containing 0.01 grammes of tetrahydrocannabinol 0.2 grammes of a mixture of plant materials containing traces of methamphetamine and tetrahydrocannabinol, contrary to section 8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance. The 4th charge is a charge of possession of apparatus fit and intended for the inhalation of dangerous drugs, contrary to section 36(1) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134, laws of Hong Kong.

2.The amended Summary of Facts which you have admitted indicate that at 1.20 am on 8 June police officers saw the 1st defendant, who is named in the indictment, entering premises where you live.  He came out of the premises subsequently and was intercepted by the police.  The police then entered your premises and intercepted you.  They then searched your premises and found the drugs and the paraphernalia being the subject matter of the three charges at various locations inside the premises.

3.You were arrested and in the course of a video interview with the police you, inter alia, told them that the 1st defendant was a drug trafficker and that he would store “Ice” in your premises and then take some out for sale.  On the day in question you told the police that he came around to the premises at about 10.45 pm and brought some “Ice” to your home. Later on he telephoned you and asked you to bring the “Ice” out for him for sale.  Some of the “Ice” you told the police was used by yourself as a reward.

4.You are a Filipina aged 37 and have been taking “Ice” I am told since about 2010.  Through your habit of taking drugs you came to know the 1st defendant, who asked you to store drugs for him in your premises.  You stupidly eventually agreed as he paid you a small amount of money for doing this and also you were able to use some of the drugs for yourself.

5.In sentencing you I do of course take everything that has been said on your behalf by your counsel into account.  To some degree, it seems to me, that the 1st defendant is the real culprit in this case despite the fact that he has not been charged with trafficking.  That is a decision that the Department of Justice have taken but I am satisfied that it is through no fault of yours that that decision has been taken.  It is clear to me that you have given full details of the role the 1st defendant played and the fact that you were merely his storekeeper.  Nevertheless, that being said, it is trite law that storekeepers can expect to receive no less than the customary sentencing guidelines associated with the type of drug and quantity.

6.I also of course take into account that some of these drugs - I am unable to say exactly how much - but a small portion of these drugs I am satisfied were for your own consumption.  I refer of course to the drugs in Charge 2.

7.Regarding Charge 2, the sentencing guidelines for trafficking in “Ice” can be found in Attorney-General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125, and for quantities of up to 10 grammes the sentence range is between 3 to 7 years’ imprisonment.

8.In the present case this court is dealing with 5.29 grammes of narcotic and, accordingly, I adopt as my starting point a sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment.  I will of course discount that by one-third to take account of your plea of guilty, coming to 40 months’ imprisonment.

9.To take account of the fact that a portion of these drugs were for your own consumption and to reflect the assistance that you have given the police, I propose to deduct a further 10 months’ imprisonment, arriving at a sentence of 2½ years’ imprisonment on Charge 2.

10.On Charge 3, I adopt a starting point of 9 months’ imprisonment which I will reduce to 6 months due to your plea of guilty, and on Charge 4 I sentence you to 2 months’ imprisonment which is already discounted to take account of your plea.

11.Due to the question of totality of sentence, I order all these sentences to run concurrently with each other, arriving at an overall sentence of 2½ years’ imprisonment in all.