HKSAR v. Lai Tsz Keung

DCCC997/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 997 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to two charges, one of trafficking in dangerous drugs, the 2nd charge of possession of apparatus fit and intended for the smoking or inhalation of dangerous drugs.

2.The drugs the subject of the 1st charge were located at premises at which the defendant resided on 14 August 2012.  They included 6.32 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, 1.71 grammes of ketamine, 1.21 grammes of cocaine and .06 grammes of Nimetazepam.  The inhalation devices were also located at his premises.

3.The facts admitted disclose that in the early hours of 14 August police officers mounted an anti-narcotics operation and went to his premises.  Inside his premises they found the drugs the subject of the charge, and also materials for use for inhalation of drugs.  In addition there was two piles of small plastic bags and an electronic scale.  He said that the drugs belonged to him.  In the recorded interview he said he rented the flat for $4,300 per month.  He said the drugs were for his self-consumption but he would sometimes sell “ice” to his friends upon their request.  The market value of the drugs was just over $6,500.  He had $3,000 in his possession when he was arrested.   

4.The defendant has seven previous court appearances in relation to 19 charges.  They cover a variety of offences and there are only two for possession of dangerous drugs.  I am told that the defendant is aged 39.  He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 2 level. He was married in 2003 and separated from his wife two years later.  He now has a stable girlfriend who is pregnant, and they intend to get married.

5.The defendant was working as a painter, earning $7,000 per month.  His parents are in their 60s and he has three elder brothers and three elder sisters.  The only mitigation in this case is the fact that he has pleaded guilty.  I take into account that some of the drugs found in his possession would have been for his own consumption.

6.The defendant was found in possession of a number of different kinds of drug.  The quantity of methamphetamine hydrochloride would ordinarily attract a sentence of around 4½ years, the ketamine would attract a sentence in excess of 2 years, and the cocaine a sentence of 2 to 5 years. 

7.I had considered the totality of the drugs found in his possession when arriving at sentence, and I have also taken into account, as I mentioned previously, that some of these drugs were for his own consumption.  In considering the appropriate sentence it seems to me a sentence of 5½ to 5¾ years would be appropriate.

8.Having considered the fact that some of the drugs were for his own consumption I have decided to take a starting point of five years imprisonment.  I reduce that by one-third to reflect his plea, so the sentence on Charge 1 will be 40 months’ imprisonment. 

9.In respect of the 2nd charge, I take a starting point of 9 months’ imprisonment and I reduce that to 6 months to reflect the guilty plea, and I order that that sentence run concurrently with the sentence on Charge 1.  The defendant will therefore go to prison for 40 months.