COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty in a magistrate’s court to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. Today he pleaded guilty again before me and was convicted of the charge. In sentencing, I have considered the whole circumstances of the case, including its nature and facts, in particular the type and quantity of the dangerous drug involved, his background and mitigation put forward on his behalf.
The facts of the case are simple. When police officers conducted a search on the defendant at a staircase in a public housing estate building, a total of 39 packets containing ketamine was found on him. The total quantity was 500.14 grammes of solids, containing 379.79 grammes of ketamine.
I was told that the defendant is 22 years of age. He had received education up to form 2 level, then he was employed in a restaurant. Despite his relatively young age, he is not a first-time offender. Since 2010 he was on three occasions convicted of the offence of possession of dangerous drug. In 2012 he was sentenced to receive treatment in a DATC. Upon his discharge in October 2012, he found a job, but became unemployed in April this year.
The learned defence counsel, Mr Chau, told me that the defendant was living with his parents. His father, who is a retired person, is suffering from eye disease. His mother is a garbage collector. The family was in great financial difficulties and the defendant needed money to satisfy his drug addiction. Mr Chau said that it was under these circumstances that the defendant succumbed to temptation and agreed to help a friend to keep the dangerous drug for him and deliver it back to him for a reward. It was said that the defendant was arrested while he was on the way to deliver the dangerous drug back to his friend.
Mr Chau urged me to take into account that the defendant has pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is now remorseful. He also asked me to take into account that this is the first trafficking offence the defendant has committed.
The Court of Appeal suggested in the case of SJ v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1 that a sentence of 9 to 12 years imprisonment should be considered for trafficking in ketamine with a narcotic content between 300 and 600 grammes. In all the circumstances, I do not find there are good grounds to depart from the tariff. Obviously drug addition is the main problem for the defendant. He did not benefit from the treatment in DATC and just after slightly more than 6 months of his discharge, he committed a further offence and a much more serious offence.
Defendant, please stand up. I will adopt a starting point of 9½ years, which I consider is appropriate and sufficient in the present case. You have pleaded guilty and are entitled to a one-third discount. I have considered the whole circumstances, including what Mr Chau has said on your behalf. In my judgment, that is the extent of discount you are entitled to.
For these reasons, I sentence you to an imprisonment term of 6 years and 4 months.