HKSAR v. Yip Yuk Chun

HCCC 289/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 289 OF 2014

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

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

COURT: This matter was originally listed for trial before me, the trial to commence today and to last for eight days. After the pre-trial review before Zervos J, the defendant indicated by letter dated 17 March 2015 that she wished to plead guilty, that is, to the one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs which she faced. To that charge, as amended today to take into account the proper spelling of her name, she has pleaded guilty, and she is formally convicted of trafficking in 18.58 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride or “Ice” as it is commonly called.

The facts have been read out by Mr Whitehouse for the prosecution already but, in short, the defendant, who is a sex worker, was found to have in her possession at her home three packets of “Ice” totalling 18.58 grammes. In the same bag, there were a quantity of resealable plastic bags and some sensitive electronic scales. The value of the drugs at the time of her arrest is agreed to be HK$9,900. On arrest, she admitted having the drugs although she said she had purchased them from Fei Chai Kwok for HK$4,000.

In mitigation, Mr Luk submits that the defendant is a divorcee who has had to fend for herself. Being poorly educated, she has therefore had to resort to selling her body to make a living. She lives in humble circumstances, subletting two rooms in her flat and making sufficient income from that to pay her rent of $8,000 per month.

He further submits that 50 per cent of the methamphetamine hydrochloride was in fact for the defendant’s self-consumption. She, he says, has been an addict since 2013.

Given that there was no evidence of consumption of “Ice” at the time of arrest and the quantity of resealable bags found alongside the three bags of “Ice”, I find it hard to believe that 50 per cent of the “Ice” was for her own consumption. But Mr Whitehouse on behalf of the prosecution cannot gainsay that assertion and accepts that quantity as being for her own use. And I will sentence therefore on that basis.

The defendant is not a first-time offender. However, the matters revealed in the criminal record appear to relate in the most part to her current mode of employment, and they all date back to 1986. They do not therefore fall to be considered by me when passing sentence in this case.

I consider the following cases provided helpfully to me by both counsel: HKSAR v Wong Suet Han or Hau - I cannot read my own writing, gentlemen - [2002] 1 HKLRD 69, HKSAR v Tsang Chung Keung [2015] 1 HKLRD 450, HKSAR v Chow Chun Sang [2012] 2 HKLRD 1121, HKSAR v Law Num Chun [2014] 5 HKLRD 500, and of course Attorney General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125.

Will the defendant please stand up? Following the guidelines set out in Attorney General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125, I adopt a starting point of 7 years and 5 months after trial for the 18.58 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride found in your possession and to which you have pleaded guilty to trafficking. Given the acceptance by the prosecution of your 50 per cent consumption of that quantity, taking into account that there is an offence of possession of that amount and the latent risk that within that amount you may have supplied it to others, I discount that starting point by 18 months and then I give you a further one-third discount for your plea of guilty.

Having considered therefore the whole of the circumstances of this case, including everything said on your behalf by counsel, I sentence you on Count 1 of the amended indictment to imprisonment for a period of 4 years and 6 months.

(Disposal of exhibits and discussion re miscalculation of sentence)

Could the defendant please stand up? Miss Yip, I apologise for that and congratulations to the interpreter who I gathered was calculating it correctly. I made a starting point of 7 years and 5 months. That stands. And so the gentlemen are following me, that is 89 months. I am now going to give you a discount for the self-consumption element of 20 months, making it 69 months, and then I am going to take a third off for the plea of guilty which makes it 46 months. 3 years and 10 months is the ultimate calculation which I intended.