HKSAR v. Wong Hei Tung

DCCC 1109/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1109 OF 2013

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

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

2.The particulars of the offence are that on 23 September 2013 at Ning Po Street near Nathan Road in Yau Ma Tei, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 0.24 grammes of a powder containing 0.18 grammes of ketamine and 70.27 grammes of a solid containing 38.13 grammes of ketamine, a total of 38.31 grammes of ketamine.

3.This is a stop-and-search case, where the police on 23 September last year at about 10.30 pm saw the defendant and thought he acted suspiciously.

4.They asked the defendant to one side outside 317 Nathan Road and searched him.  Their suspicions were proved accurate, when dangerous drugs were found in the defendant’s trouser pocket and both his left and right shoe.  In his pocket they found a paper packet containing powder that contained 0.18 grammes of ketamine.  Then, they found a total of 10 plastic bags of ketamine in both shoes, containing a solid found to be 38.13 grammes of ketamine.

5.The defendant was arrested for trafficking in dangerous drugs and cautioned.

6.The defendant admitted that “Ah Dee” of Wong Tai Sin asked him to bring the drugs to Nathan Road for a reward of $800.  He was to be paid after the dangerous drugs were successfully delivered.

7.Later on at the police station in a video record of interview, the defendant gave more detail of the offence and elaborated further.

8.He fully cooperated with the police. Essentially he agreed that he was a courier for all of the drugs on behalf of a man nicknamed “Ah Dee”.

9.He had two mobile phones in his possession when he was arrested and 2,000-odd dollars.

10.The agreed street value for this quantity of ketamine is $8,602.

11.The defendant is not a man of clear record.  He has six previous convictions:  three related to possession of dangerous drugs and one charge of equipment fit and intended for taking dangerous drugs.  For these drug offences, he has been fined, ordered to serve a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre order, as well as serve probation.  His last conviction was in December 2010, where he was sentenced 8 months’ imprisonment for a theft offence.

12.I have been given details of the defendant’s background. He is 27 years old and single.  His parents are divorced and he lives with his mother and elder sister.  Defendant did not finish school and, when he was arrested last September, he had been unemployed for a long time.  He is a drug addict.

13.He now says that not all of the drugs were for trafficking, but a small amount found in his pocket (0.18 grammes of ketamine) was for his own consumption.

14.Defendant has pleaded guilty to a serious offence. He accepts he is a drug mule and there is no evidence he is anything else but a drug mule.

15.However, he is a cog in the wheel of a destructive, evil aspect of our society.  Without such cogs, drug dealers could not distribute drugs easily.  So, being a drug courier only does not attract a more lenient sentence.

16.I have considered all the mitigation put forward.  The defendant’s best mitigation is his plea today.

17.I will take into account he has no previous trafficking convictions.

18.I have been referred to and have considered the sentencing guidelines set out in the authority of The Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2008] 3 HKC 323.  The Court of Appeal gave guidelines and the relevant one here is where between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine is trafficked, a starting point of between 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment would be appropriate.

19.Mathematically speaking, 40 grammes of ketamine would attract a 5½-year starting point.  30 grammes would attract a 5-year starting point.  Here, the total is 38.31 grammes.

20.Defendant, please stand up.

21.Having considered the facts I have just referred to, mitigation put forward, the defendant’s letter of remorse and explanation, as well as the quantity of dangerous drugs here, I do accept that he may be a drug addict, looking at his previous convictions, and I accept that the 0.18 grammes of ketamine found in a powder form in a paper packet in his pocket may very well be for his own consumption.  It is more likely when I consider that the balance of the dangerous drugs was in a solid form packed in bags hidden in his shoes.

22.Having considered that as well, I find in this case a starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment appropriate.

23.Defendant is entitled to a discount of one-third for his plea; that is a discount of 20 months.

24.Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 3 years and 4 months for this offence.

COURT: You understand that sentence?

DEFENDANT: Understood.