HKSAR v. Yip Yung Sang

DCCC 533/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 533 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty today to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

2.The particulars are that on 27 March, the defendant was stopped and searched at the rear lane of 163-173 Portland Street, Mong Kok.  A resealable plastic bag containing 70 packets of suspected heroin wrapped in paper was found in his left front trouser pocket.  He also had $2,385 on his person.

3.Under caution, he told the police that he had possession of the dangerous drugs for his own consumption. 

4.He later told the police that he had bought the drugs for $11,200 in Yau Ma Tei just before he was arrested.  He explained he bought so many pellets because he would get a discount for buying in bulk.

5.The prosecution estimate the value of the drugs to be just over HK$8,000.

6.The prosecution did not accept the defendant’s admission and charged him with trafficking the quantity of dangerous drugs.

7.The drugs were ultimately determined to be 12.67 grammes of a mixture containing 9.99 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

8.The defendant is 63 years old.  He is single but has an adult son.  Prior to his arrest, he was on public assistance of $4,500 a month. 

9.He is not a man of clear record.  He has many previous convictions.  The majority relate to selling illegal cigarettes.  He has one previous similar conviction for trafficking in dangerous drugs in the year 2009; he was sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment.  From the reasons of sentence for that conviction I can see that he admitted helping to pack heroin and acted as a courier, a deliveryman.

10.I have seen the defendant’s antecedent and have been told it is accurate.  It says the defendant is medically fit, not of ill health.  There is no reference to any drug addiction.  However, the defendant has written a letter to the court, saying that due to his mother’s death in 2008, he, in order to deal with the grief, started to take heroin. 

11.In fact, it was part of his mitigation today that he had bought the drugs for his own consumption and not for the purposes of trafficking.  However, that submission has now been withdrawn.  The defendant does accept he was in possession for purposes of trafficking.  He intended to sell the heroin.

12.I will not repeat the mitigation I have heard today and I have had sight of and considered a letter written by the defendant.  He expresses his remorse for again committing this offence.

13.As correctly pointed out by defence counsel, there are guidelines applicable here, in particular, R v Lau Tak Ming,

14.I see no reason to depart from the guidelines.  I find no aggravating or mitigating factor exists that would mean a deduction in the starting point or an increase in the starting point.

15.Accordingly, after considering all the facts, the defendant’s background, age, other mitigation and his plea, I take a starting point of 4 years and 6 months.

16.The defendant is entitled to a discount of one-third for his plea today.

17.Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment for this offence.

COURT: Do you understand?

DEFENDANT: Understood.