HKSAR v. Chau Tsz Lok
|
DCCC 11/2014 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 11 OF 2014 -----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
---------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ---------------------------- Charge and facts 1.The defendant pleads guilty to drug trafficking. In the afternoon on 19 November 2013, during an anti-drug patrol at the staircase of a public housing block in Sham Shui Po, the police found the defendant suspicious as he walked down the staircase from the 21st floor with his hand pressing his jean pocket tightly. 2.A stop and search yielded a resealable plastic bag from his jean pocket. The bag contained the following:
3.After arrest and caution, he said that he brought cocaine and ketamine for someone. In a subsequent video-recorded interview under caution, he said that he was not a drug addict and that someone had asked him to deliver dangerous drugs for a reward of $1,000. Personal background and mitigation 4.He is 16 years of age. He has been the subject of a Care and Protection Order for 15 months made in September 2012 for claiming to be a triad member. At the time of arrest, he was still under the said order. As he is found to be a drug dependant, the Training Centre Report does not find him suitable for detention in a Training Centre. I do not find other institutional options, which are softer than the Training Centre, potentially appropriate to reflect the seriousness of the circumstances of the offence. Such other options, apart from the prison, will send a wrong message to young people who may be tempted into drug trafficking. Sentencing guidelines 5.There are sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine laid down in HKSAR v Hii Siew Cheng [2007] 1 HKLRD 1. For 10 – 50 g of ketamine, the sentence shall be 4 – 6 years. Sentencing this defendant 6.I take 4 years as the starting point. I give one-third discount for his plea of guilty. There are no other mitigating factors. The sentence is 2 years and 8 months.
|
Cases cited in this judgment