HKSAR v. or Ka-chun

DCCC 354/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 354 OF 2013

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The dangerous drug involved was 12.87 grammes of ketamine.

2.The facts to which the defendant admitted reveal that at about 5.05 pm on 28 February 2013, the defendant was stopped and searched by police officers outside Ground Floor, The Apex, 33 Wo Yi Hup Road, Kwai Chung. 

3.Upon search, two transparent resealable plastic bags were found inside his right front trouser pocket.  One of the plastic bags contained 13.81 grammes of powder containing

4.At the scene and in subsequent video recorded interview, the defendant, under caution, admitted that he was instructed by a male named “Ah Bun” to deliver the drugs in question to On Yam Estate for a reward of $200.

5.At about 3 to 4 pm on the day in question, he first went to collect the drugs from a rubbish bin at the staircase on 14th Floor of Tsing Yat House.  He was prepared to put them into a rubbish bun at the bus terminus of On Yam Estate before he was apprehended.

6.The estimated street value of the drugs seized was about $1,873.

7.The defendant is now 18 years of age.  He was educated up to Form 2.  He resides with his senile grandmother, father and a twin brother.  It is unfortunate that his father lost his working capacity due to his leg injuries and he is now living on public assistance.

8.The defendant took out open employment at the age of 16 and worked as casual worker.   His previous monthly income was about $11,000 and he contributed about 3 to 4 thousand to support his family financially.  Prior to arrest, he was unemployed.

9.I have also carefully considered the contents of a letter written by him, in which he stated he is now very remorseful.

10.In 2011, the defendant was put on probation for a theft conviction.  In 2012, a binding-over order was imposed upon him.

11.Trafficking in dangerous drugs is a very serious offence.  The sentencing tariffs have been laid down by the Court of Appeal in Hii Siew Cheng.  For trafficking of ketamine, where the narcotic content is between 10 to 50 grammes, the starting point is within a range of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment.

12.I note that the defendant is 18 years of age. It is, however, not a case of extreme youth.  For this type of offence, youth is of little assistance because if it is regarded as a mitigating factor, it will attract even younger traffickers.

13.In decided cases, it is stressed that training centre is not an appropriate sentence for trafficking offences, save in exceptional circumstances.

14.In this case, the defendant committed the offence for a meager reward or quick money.

15.In my judgment, a deterrent sentence is called for, otherwise criminals would be encouraged to make use of youngsters to engage in trafficking activities.

16.Having considered everything urged upon me in mitigation, the quantity involved and all the circumstances, I adopt a starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment.

17.To reflect his guilty plea, the sentence is then reduced to 32 months.

18.Having considered his young age and family background, I will further reduce the sentence by 3 months.

19.In the result, the defendant is sentenced to 29 months’ imprisonment.

20.Insofar as the binding-over order is concerned, I note that it was in force at the time of the offence.  However, the binding-over order has specified the nature of the acts that the defendant shall be restrained from doing.  Apparently, the nature of this case is wholly different from the specified acts stated in the order.

21.I, therefore, will not find a breach and make no order for it.