HKSAR v. Chan Kar Chung
|
DCCC 1031/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1031 OF 2013 -----------------------------------
---------------------------- 1.The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to s.(4)(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134. Particulars of the charge are that the defendant on 1 September 2013 at the junction of Portland Street and Shantung Street in Mongkok, unlawfully trafficked in 16.21g of powder containing 13.23g of ketamine. Facts 2.Police officers laid ambush at the staircase on the 2nd floor of the building located at no.181 Portland Street during an anti-narcotics operation. The defendant was seen to leave a unit on the 1st floor of the building at 4pm. Police officers followed and observed the defendant acting suspiciously upon reaching the junction of Portland and Shantung Street. The defendant was then intercepted and searched. 3.5 small transparent re-sealable plastic bags with powder inside; 1 large transparent re-sealable plastic bag with powder inside; and 23 transparent re-sealable plastic bags were found in the sling bag the defendant was carrying. 4.Later examination confirmed that there the bags of powder were mixture with a total narcotic content of 13.23g of ketamine. The estimated street price was about $1,977.60. 5.The defendant was also found to be in possession of 5 mobile phones and cash of $40,544.50 and RMB9. 6.The defendant was arrested and cautioned. Under caution, he stated that it was the first time he helped another person to deliver drugs and asked for a chance. In a subsequent video recorded interview, the defendant stated under caution that it was “Ah Wai” who told him to deliver the ketamine at around 12pm on that day. After the defendant took possession of the ketamine from “Ah Wai”, he wandered around in Mongkok because “Ah Wai” told him to wait for a phone call before delivering the drugs to another person. The defendant however did not receive that call. The defendant is a kitchen worker earning $11,000 per month. Previous convictions 7.The defendant has 3 previous convictions but none similar. His last conviction was in October 2013 for possession of dangerous drugs when he was fined $3,000. Mitigation 8.The defendant is 41 years old. He and his cohabitee resides with their 8 year old son in Shenzhen. The defendant is a responsible son, contributing about $2,000 to $3,000 per month to his 68 year old mother. The defendant also supports his cohabitee and son. 9.Mr. Cham pointed out that this is the defendant’s first conviction for trafficking in dangerous drugs. The defendant was a drug dependent at that time, as evidenced by his possession of dangerous drugs conviction in October 2013. The quantity in question on that occasion was 1.25g of ketamine and he was fined $3,000 after pleading guilty. It is not the defendant’s position that any of the ketamine found in his possession in the present case was for his own consumption. Sentencing tariffs 10.The sentencing tariff for trafficking in ketamine is found in the case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng (許守城) [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, CAAR7/2006. The sentence after trial for trafficking between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine is between 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment. Sentence 11.The maximum sentence for trafficking in dangerous drugs is that of life imprisonment. 12.Having heard the defendant’s mitigation, I find that there is nothing that would persuade me to depart from the guideline sentencing tariffs. 13.For the 13.23g of ketamine that the defendant had trafficked in, I adopt a starting point of 48 months’ imprisonment. I grant the defendant the full one-third discount for his guilty plea and sentence him to 32 months’ imprisonment.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment