HKSAR v. Chung Kai Ming

DCCC 1124/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1124 OF 2012

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in a total of 23.33grammes of ketamine, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.

2.In summary around 0036 hours on the 9th October last year the police whilst patrolling along Shanghai Street in Mongkok saw the defendant walking towards them.  As the police approached nearer the defendant crossed to the other side of the road.  When the police asked the defendant to stop the defendant ignored them and continued to walk at fast pace.  The police gave chase and eventually stopped the defendant outside No. 669 Shanghai Street. 

3.A struggle ensued during which a white plastic bag, inside which were 8 empty re-sealable plastic bags, fell out of the defendant’s left front trouser pocket. A transparent re-sealable plastic bag containing 10.91 grammes of ketamine was found in the defendant’s right hand.  Another re-sealable plastic bag containing 1.61 grammes of ketamine and two $20 bank notes containing a small amount of ketamine were found in the defendant’s right front trouser pocket.  The defendant’s satchel was also searched and one more re-sealable plastic bag containing 10.57 grammes of ketamine was found together with a plastic bag containing 8 more empty re-sealable plastic bags. 

4.In Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng[2008] 3 HKC 325 the Court of Appeal laid down guidelines for trafficking in ketamine.  Where the narcotic content is between 10 and 50 grammes sentence after trial falls within the range of 4-6 years imprisonment. In all the circumstances I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial for 23.33 grammes of ketamine is 4 years and 6 months imprisonment. 

5.In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on behalf of the defendant by Miss Cheung.  Miss Cheung submits that the ketamine found in the right front trouser pocket was used by the defendant and that most of the ketamine found in his hand and in his satchel was also for his own consumption. 

6.Clearly from the criminal record and antecedents the defendant is a long term drug addict.  He has no prior convictions for drug trafficking.  Further I note the defendant under caution said all the drugs were for his own consumption.  In these circumstances I am prepared to accept the ketamine found in his right front trouser pocket was for his own use.  I do not however accept most of the ketamine found in his hand and in his satchel were also for his own consumption, although being an addict some may have been.

7.In deciding how much weight should be attached to the fact some of the drugs were for the defendant’s own use I have considered the decision in HKSAR v. Wong Suet Hau [2002] 1 HKLRD 69, in particular paragraphs 33 and 34 together with the case of HKSAR v Chow Chun Sang [2012] 2 HKLRD 1121.

8.Taking into account the quantity and packaging of the ketamine; that the ketamine was found on the defendant in the street in the early hours of the morning; there were empty re-sealable bags suitable for trafficking; possession of drugs carries a sentence in any event; and the latent risk factor, I am satisfied the starting point should be reduced by   9 months to one of 3 years and 9 months imprisonment.  Giving the defendant full credit for his plea of guilty he is convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.