COURT: The facts, which the defendant has accepted, could not be more simple. On 14 December 2012 police were watching in the vicinity of Leung Choy Building in Yuen Long for someone who they believed would be in possession of drugs.
The defendant drew attention to himself by his furtive behaviour when he appeared on a bicycle at 25 past 9 in the evening. He was searched and found to have the crystalline solid containing 12.47 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, “Ice”, in his jacket.
The value of this quantity of “Ice” was estimated as being about $9,174.
Originally the defendant was charged with trafficking in dangerous drugs, but the prosecution have now, very sensibly, accepted his plea to simple possession. There may have been suspicions about what the defendant was doing, but the evidence of trafficking was absent. It has been the defendant’s account all along that these drugs were for his own consumption.
The defendant is now 54 years old. He has eight previous convictions consisting of a number of charges, but the most serious of those was on 9 January 2004, when he was sentenced for two cases of trafficking in dangerous drugs, and he received a sentence in total of 4 years’ imprisonment.
He has, in addition, four previous convictions for possessing dangerous drugs, so that it can confidently be said that the defendant is no stranger to these courts, and yet he seems to find it impossible to leave a way of life linked to dangerous drugs.
He has twice before been sent to the drug addiction treatment centre, and no good has come of it. On the last occasion, which was 2 June 2011, when he was sentenced for possessing dangerous drugs, he received a total sentence in regard to those two offences of 10 months’ imprisonment.
The DATC report in the present case prepared by Ho Wing‑shing, with great care and going into considerable detail, indicates that as the defendant is now no longer drug dependent after seven months in custody, he is not considered a suitable candidate for admission to a drug addiction treatment centre.
In HKSAR v Mok Tso Tik [2001] 1 HKC 261, the procedure is set out for dealing with a case of possession similar to the example found in this instance.
“A genuine user of dangerous drugs found in possession of a quantity of drugs for his own consumption will normally expect, except for very minor offences, a sentence in the range of 12 to 18 months’ imprisonment. But depending on the quantity, the persistence of the offender in cases of a similar nature, and certain other factors, the starting point for sentence may be higher.”
Obviously the quantity of “Ice” in this case was a relatively large amount. It was being carried in the street. The defendant has a record for trafficking as well as possession of dangerous drugs. All of these features of the case, coupled with the fact that the defendant had casual work but no regular work, indicate a very high latent risk factor.
Applying the reasoning found in Mok Tso Tik, I propose to take a starting point, before any enhancement, of 18 months’ imprisonment. The enhancement in this case is for the latent risk factor I have referred to, particularly bearing in mind the history of the defendant as a trafficker and the quantity found in his possession on arrest. That enhancement will be by 15 months.
Having regard to the defendant’s plea of guilty, he will receive full credit for it.
Would you stand, please? Your sentence is one of 22 months’ imprisonment.