HKSAR v. Khong Ngoc-xuan

Case No.DCCC 975/2014
Court
District Court
Date24 Dec 2014
Judge
Case Document
100%

DCCC 975/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 975 OF 2014

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Khong Ngoc-xuan  

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

Before: HH Judge Casewell
Date: 24 December 2014 at 11.03 am
Present: Ms Monica Chan, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Ms Hung Yuk-kwan, of Stevenson, Wong & Co, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
Offence: Trafficking in dangerous drugs (販運危險藥物)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.This defendant has pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The quantities of the drug being 1.65 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and 5 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

2.The facts are agreed.  They show that on 12 August this year, the police conducted an anti-narcotics operation at a rooftop dwelling in Shanghai Street in Mong Kok.  The defendant was present and was searched.  And in the left front pocket of his trousers was a transparent resealable plastic bag which contained a plastic packet and 36 other plastic packets that contained dangerous drugs.  Also some cash and a mobile phone was found. 

3.The defendant, under caution, said he was helping someone to sell heroin for $500 for reward. 

4.A later video recorded interview showed that he had admitted that he had been approached by a male to sell drugs.  He was taken to the place where he was arrested and given a quantity of heroin to sell to people who came to the door for sums of 300 or 150 dollars each.

5.One packet was given to him for his own consumption.  This is identified as being Exhibit E1 which was 0.02 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.  The other exhibits which were produced as Exhibits 2 to 4 were to be sold for a $500 reward for him. 

6.The estimated street value of the drugs to be sold, that is E2 to E4, was $7,378.

7.The defendant’s criminal record shows he has two previous relevant convictions.  In 1991 he was convicted of possession of a dangerous drug for unlawful trafficking, receiving 12 months’ imprisonment.  In 2005, for an offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, he received 40 months’ imprisonment and has been sent to a drug addiction treatment centre in 2012. 

8.The other antecedents show that the defendant was born in Vietnam.  He is aged 47 years.  He was educated in Vietnam but came to Hong Kong in 1985.  He became a permanent resident here in year 2000.  He was discharged from a drug addiction treatment centre on 26 July last year, 2013. 

9.Mitigation shows that the defendant was married in 1991 and divorced in 2010.  He has a 14-year-old daughter.  He provides some financial provision for both his daughter and his father.  At the time of his arrest he was a construction worker; he earned $10,000 per month.  He had also still appeared to be addicted to drugs. 

10.I was referred to the defendant’s remorse, his early plea of guilty and the general co-operation with the authorities after his arrest.

11.It is clear that the quantities of drugs trafficked by the defendant fall into the following guideline, sentence categories.  The 1.65 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride falls in the category of up to 10 grammes which is a sentence of between 3 to 7 years.  The 5 grammes of heroin hydrochloride falls in the category of up to 10 grammes which is a sentence of between 2 to 5 years’ imprisonment.

12.There is a mixture of drugs here.  I consider it appropriate to adopt the, what is described as the combined approach set out in the case of HKSAR v Cheung Kwok Leung Lowence which is Criminal Appeal 539 of 2002. 

13.There is also a possible aggravating factor in that the defendant has a poor history of consumption and trafficking in dangerous drugs.  His first conviction was in 1991 and the last one was in 2005.  I consider they are sufficiently distant in time for them not to be taken into consideration as a matter of aggravating factors for sentence in this hearing.  

14.The defendant also received a very small quantity for his own use. 

15.The starting point for heroin in a case such as this would be in the region of 2½ years’ imprisonment.  The starting point for the methamphetamine hydrochloride would be 3 years’ imprisonment.

16.For the combined drugs, I will take an overall starting point of 39 months’ imprisonment.  I will reduce that by one-third which is 30 months’ deduction, leading to a sentence

of 26 months’ imprisonment for this quantity of drug.

(T Casewell)
 District Judge