HKSAR v. Ho Shu Fat

DCCC 301/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 301 OF 2014

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to one offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, that drug being ketamine, a total of 19.95 grammes of the narcotic.

2.The defendant has admitted the facts and I have convicted him, and the relevant admitted facts show that on 14 January this year, at 8.30 am, the defendant was intercepted in the car park of the On Yam Estate in Kwai Chung.  A search was conducted, and the drugs were recovered from his underwear.  The drugs consisted of a resealable plastic bag which contained 10 resealable plastic bags with the white ketamine in it and a further one resealable plastic bag containing 11 further resealable plastic bags, each with white solid which is ketamine.  That amount of ketamine was 19.83 grammes.  A further $100 banknote was found which contained some further ketamine, and that was a total of 0.12 grammes of ketamine on that.

3.Under caution, the defendant said the packet of K is his, and he eats it himself.  He had four mobile phones, four SIM cards, cash of $5,100 on him.  Ketamine seized is valued at $3,085.38.

4.Although there were 25.29 grammes of a mixture, it actually contained 19.95 grammes of ketamine, and it is admitted that that was for the purposes of trafficking.

5.The defendant has admitted antecedents showing that he is 37 years old, educated to Secondary 2 level.  He works as a driver, was earning $15,000 a month.  He is not married but has two children (a daughter of 13 and a son of 11) and lives with his elder sisters.   

6.He has some previous convictions, six occasions in total, and most of them some years ago.  In 2001, he was fined for possession of a dangerous drug.  He has been to an adult prison in 2003 for wounding.

7.As far as mitigation is concerned, it points to the fact the defendant is a man of age 37 and he is a family man and that he has two children.  His family is supportive.  There are letters from his elder sister, from his fiancée and also from his employer.  The relevant factors are, firstly, the employer will be willing to continue to employ the defendant on his release from custody and, secondly, he had planned to marry at the end of this year which obviously will have to be postponed because of this offence.

8.As far as sentencing considerations, they are as follows.  The quantity of drug is within the 10-to-50-gramme range in the guideline sentence which puts the sentence at between 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment.  Obviously, it is higher than the lowest point but this is of course a guideline sentence, not an obligatory sentence that must be passed. 

9.The defendant says that of that drug, the 15 grammes that were found in the banknote was the result of the consumption of the drug, and he may consume a small part of the drug but he was frank enough to say it would not be significant by any means, and obviously there will be no significant reduction for this aspect.

10.The defendant has been frank and is clearly remorseful, and his family will be impacted severely by his imprisonment, the loss of an income and loss of a father’s presence for his two children who are at an age where it is important to have his society.

11.I consider the following factors when imposing sentence on the defendant: he has no previous convictions for trafficking; it does appear from his previous drug conviction that he is occasional consumer of drugs; his position in the family which I have already outlined; and finally his full admission to the facts.

12.I consider taking all these factors overall that I must have regard to the guideline sentence but I will take his starting point for sentence at the lowest point.  So the starting point for sentence in this case will be 4 years’ imprisonment.  That is 48 months’ imprisonment.  He is entitled to a one-third deduction from that.  That leaves a final sentence by my calculation of 32 months’ imprisonment for this on this charge.