HKSAR v. Lam Kwing To
|
DCCC 542/2014 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 542 OF 2014 -----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
---------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ---------------------------- 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 8 April 2014 at the junction of Shantung Street and Portland Street in Mongkok unlawfully trafficked 8.89g of a mixture containing 6.74g of heroin hydrochloride. Summary of facts 2.The defendant was stopped at the junction of Shantung Street and Portland Street at around 4:25pm on 8 April by patrolling Police officers. Upon search, a total of 45 packets of heroin mixture wrapped with plastic sheets were found inside his left front trousers pocket. The defendant said he was being paid $1,000 to deliver the drugs, that it was his first time making a delivery and asked for a chance. The defendant had on him 2 mobile phones and cash of $5,730 when arrested. 3.Nothing incriminating was found in a search conducted on the defendant’s residence at Shek Yam Estate, On Chuk Street, Kwai Chung. 4.Government chemist subsequently confirmed that the 45 packets contained a total of 8.89g of a mixture with a total narcotic contents of 6.74g of heroin hydrochloride. The seized drugs had a street value of around $10,508. Previous convictions 5.The defendant is of clear record. Mitigation 6.The defendant is 19 years old, educated up to F.5 level in Hong Kong, he was unemployed and not a drug addict. 7.The seriousness of the offence and the consequence of pleading guilty and the term of sentence he may be facing had all been explained to the defendant by Mr. Lam and yet he chose to plead guilty and should be given full credit. 8.The defendant is a young man with a clear record who had committed a serious offence. He was born in Hong Kong, but shortly after his birth his parents separated and he was brought up by his maternal grandmother. They enjoy a close relationship all along. The defendant’s mother often went back to visit him. As disclosed in the facts, when the defendant was arrested he had money with him. The money was in fact given by his mother to give to his grandmother for monthly expenses. The defendant rarely sees his father. Mr. Lam submitted that this is a typical story of a young person frequenting amusement centre and then influenced by peers of dubious character and making the wrong decision to try to earn some quick money by delivering drugs. 9.Mr. Lam rightly pointed out that the defendant’s personal background is not a mitigating factor. The defendant’s mother is not in court today because she can bear to see his son being imprisoned. The defendant’s aunt is however in court today to show support. Sentencing Guidelines 10.The applicable guidelines for trafficking in heroin hydrochloride are found in the case of R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370. Sentence for quantities up to 10g is 2 to 5 years’ imprisonment. Sentence 11.The maximum sentence for trafficking in dangerous drugs is that of life imprisonment. It is an excepted offence[1] and as such even though the defendant is under 21, imprisonment need not be the last resort[2] when sentencing. 12.Having heard from Mr. Lam the defendant’s mitigation, I find that there is nothing for me to depart from the above mentioned sentencing guideline. I am however mindful that this is the defendant’s first offence and that he had bravely chosen to indicate to the court that he will be pleading guilty to the charge at the earliest stage. This require some courage and I will credit the defendant for that. 13.For the narcotic contents of 6.74g, I will adopt an initial starting point of 48 months’ imprisonment, reducing it by 3 months in view of his clear record, and discounting it by one third giving credit to the defendant’s guilty plea. I sentence the defendant to 30 months’ imprisonment.
|