HKSAR v. Ho Wan Chiu
|
DCCC 153/2014 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 153 OF 2014 ----------------------
----------------------
--------------------- Reasons for Sentence --------------------- 1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The drugs concerned are 35.05 grammes of cocaine. 2.On 8 January 2014 at around 8.35 pm, officers noticed the defendant acting furtively, looking nervous, looking around, with both hands in his coat pocket, and walking at a fast pace. He was stopped and searched, and during the search the officer found from the left pocket of his inner jacket three transparent resealable plastic bags, and they are the drugs the subject of the charge. 3.The defendant was arrested and cautioned at the scene. He said that he was carrying the drugs for somebody else; they were not for his own consumption; and he had not received a reward. 4.When interviewed at the police station, the defendant told the interviewing officers that he was instructed to meet a female called “Ah Mun” at Tsz Wan Shan Centre by a person called “Ah Wai”. The defendant said that he was later handed the drugs at the podium on the 3rd floor of the Tsz Wan Shan Centre and he was told to deliver them to “Ah Wai”. He said that “Ah Wai” was to give him $550 for each bag successfully delivered. 5.At the time of his arrest, the defendant had a mobile phone in his possession and $53.20. 6.The value of the cocaine is $48,890. 7.The defendant has a clear record. He was 18 at the time of the offence, and he is now aged 19. He was educated to Secondary 4 level. At the time of his arrest he was working as an attendant at a hotel earning $12,000 per month, out of which he gave 4,000 to his parents. He has parents and two elder sisters, and they obviously care about him, because they were in court on the last occasion he appeared before this court, and they are in court again today. 8.I adjourned the case on the last occasion so that I could have the advantage of a report prepared by the Commissioner of Correctional Services. The report says that the defendant was born into a working class family, being the youngest of three siblings. His father is a decoration worker and his mother used to be a general labourer on a construction site. 9.In the opinion of the officer who prepared the report, the parents failed to render sufficient supervision and guidance over the defendant during his upbringing. The defendant’s academic performance was reported to be unsatisfactory in both is primary and early secondary education. Thereafter he became wayward and joined two triad societies. He started working in mid‑2012 with an unstable pattern, and he quit his job in December 2013. The defendant started engaging in drug‑trafficking activities in early January 2014 under the introduction of his triad peers. 10.The author of the report concluded that in view of the weak self-control ability and law‑abiding concepts of the defendant, a period of disciplinary training, coupled with statutory supervision, would be considered beneficial for his reformation. The defendant is mentally and physically fit for detention in a training centre, and from information available, and after general assessment of his behaviour and attitude whilst on remand, the officer considered him suitable for detention in a training centre. 11.I am told by counsel representing the defendant that the defendant wishes not to go to the training centre, but would rather have the only other sentence which is available to this court, namely, a sentence of imprisonment. 12.The starting point for a term of imprisonment for trafficking in this quantity of drugs is 6½ years. As the defendant has pleaded guilty to the charge, he is entitled to that sentence to be reduced by one-third to 4 years and 4 months’ imprisonment. 13.However, I have to look at the overall situation. The detention in a training centre would also be for a considerable period of time - it could be up to 3 years - and there is a scheme of statutory supervision. It seems to me that the regime and training he would receive in the training centre would be far more beneficial to him and also to society. He would emerge from the training centre in a far better position as regards future employment possibilities. Also, on this young man’s record it would say “Training Centre” rather than “4 years 4 months’ imprisonment”. 14.So despite the defendant’s wishes, I am not minded to agree with his request that he go to prison rather than to the training centre. As I say, in the long term, it will be in his interests and also in the interests of society. 15.The defendant will be detained in a training centre.
Please refer to CAAR5/2014 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal. |