HKSAR v. Tong Yat Keung

Case No.HCCC 514/2013
Court
High Court CFI
Date09 Apr 2014
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC 514/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 514 OF 2013

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  TONG Yat-keung  

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

Before: Hon Andrew Chan J
Date: 9 April 2014 at 9.54 am
Present: Miss Lilly Wong, SPP (Ag) of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Mr Gordon Y W Wong, instructed by the Director of Legal Aid, for the accused
Offence: Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. Summary of Facts reveals the following: On the material day, the defendant was intercepted by police officers. Inside a shoebox which the defendant was carrying at the time, police officer discovered the presence of 27 bags of suspected dangerous drug. The defendant was then arrested and cautioned.

In a recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he was promised $1,000 for the successful delivery of the suspected dangerous drug. The suspected dangerous drug was subsequently found to contain 36.12 grammes of methamphetamine, 10.47 grammes of cocaine, and 10.02 grammes of ketamine. The street value was estimated to be just over HK$40,000.

The defendant is 42, and has five criminal records, none, however, relate to drugs.

Guidelines on sentencing are clear. Thirty-six grammes of methamphetamine alone will attract a starting point of 99 months’ imprisonment. Assuming all the other drugs are treated gram for gram as if they were amphetamine, the total amount of drugs in this case would be in the region of 56 grammes. Fifty-six grammes of methamphetamine would attract a sentence of 9 years and 3 months - that is 111 months’ imprisonment.

In the circumstances of this particular case, I think this is a fairer approach.

Apart from the defendant’s plea, there is nothing in this case to justify any further reduction. The defendant is, of course, entitled to his one-third discount.

In conclusion, for the offence the defendanthas pleaded, he is sentence to six years and two months’ imprisonment.