COURT: This is the sentence.
Background and the Facts
The defendant pleaded guilty before me to three counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.
Briefly, the defendant was stopped by the police on 26 November 2012 when he emerged from Harbour Plaza 8 Degrees Hotel and was about to get into his car which he had parked outside the hotel about 20 minutes earlier. After the interception the police conducted a search on the defendant and found inside the defendant’s shoulder bag two tinfoil bags with a total of 48 grammes of a solid containing 34.80 grammes of cocaine. Under caution, the defendant admitted delivering the drug for a reward. This forms the subject matter of the 1st count.
Then the police found on the defendant’s person a key card to Room 633 of the hotel. Upon a search of the room the police found three tinfoil bags containing a total of 71.91 grammes of a solid containing 52.86 grammes of cocaine. The tinfoil bags were stored inside a black bag put underneath the table in the hotel room.
In addition, other paraphernalia including a large number of small resealable plastic bags, empty tinfoil bags, two electronic scales, a lighter and one roll of tinfoil paper were found inside the room. Under caution the defendant admitted that the three bags belonged to him. This is the subject matter of the 2nd count.
Finally, the defendant was taken back to the car which he had parked outside the hotel. Upon search, three more tinfoil bags containing a total of 36.05 grammes of a solid containing 28.61 grammes of cocaine were found inside a nylon bag near the gear lever of the car. This forms the subject matter of the 3rd count.
During subsequent interviews with the police the defendant made further admissions saying that he had been asked to rent the hotel room and had been provided with the car for drug delivery.
The total weight of cocaine involved was 116.27 grammes and the estimated street value of the drug was about HK$182,000.
Mitigation
The defendant is aged 37 and is divorced. He was educated up to Form 4 level. At the time of the offence the defendant was unemployed but he had been a transportation worker previously.
The defendant has been before the court on five previous occasions with two convictions for trafficking in a dangerous drug, two of possession of a dangerous drug and one of common assault. For the trafficking in a dangerous drug offence the defendant was respectively sentenced to 7½ years and 4 months’ imprisonment in May 1999 and February 2011.
Although the defendant’s latest trafficking in a dangerous drug conviction was in 2011 - that means in less than two years time the defendant committed an identical offence on this occasion - I am not going to increase his sentence on the basis of his trafficking record as his more serious trafficking in a dangerous drug offence was committed in 1999, more than 10 years ago.
In mitigation it was said that the defendant committed the present offence because he was in need of money. Moreover, Ms Chow said that the defendant intended to take some of the drug in the hotel room for his own consumption. However, Ms Chow has made it clear to the court that it is not a suggestion to say that the amount would be a significant amount which would meaningfully affect the sentence in this case. This concession is of course rightly made given the facts of this case.
The Sentence
It is well settled that in cases like the present in which different parcels of drugs were found on the same day and were in relation to closely-linked facts, the combined weight of the drug involved should be taken into account in arriving at an overall starting point. See, for example, HKSAR v Wong To, CACC 508/2000, 7 August 2001, unreported.
In AG v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] 2 HKLR 69, it was held that the guidelines for heroin trafficking laid down in R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370, were also applicable to the sentencing of cocaine trafficking. In the case of Lau Tak Ming trafficking between 50 and 200 grammes of heroin will attract a term of imprisonment of between 8 to 12 years.
Having considered the facts of this case and for the total weight of 116.27 grammes of cocaine involved, I consider an overall starting point of 9 years and 9 months to be appropriate and I will adopt this as the starting point for each of the 1st, 2nd and the 3rd counts.
The defendant pleaded guilty so he will receive a one-third reduction for that. Other than his plea there is nothing in this case which would warrant any further reduction in sentence.
The defendant is therefore to serve a term of 6½ years’ imprisonment for each count. For the reason of totality, all of the three terms are to be served wholly concurrently making a total of 6½ years.