Background and the facts
The defendant pleaded guilty before me to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section (4)(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.
Briefly, on 22 April 2013 the police spotted a motorcar stopping outside a public housing estate in Tsuen Wan. At the time there were three persons onboard the car. A couple was sitting in the front while the defendant was at the rear passenger’s seat behind the driver. Then the police saw the defendant getting out of the car. He was carrying a bag at the time. After walking for some distance, the defendant moved hastily back to the car. However, the defendant was stopped by the police at that juncture.
Upon search, six resealable plastic bags containing 71.96 grammes of a solid containing 57.14 grammes of cocaine was found inside the defendant’s bag.
The defendant was arrested and a search of the car took place. As a result, 14 plastic bags with 160 grammes of a solid containing 130 grammes of cocaine were found in another bag which was placed on the floor of the car where the defendant had been sitting.
The estimated street value of drugs seized, that is a total of 231.96 grammes of a solid containing 187.14 grammes of cocaine was about $237,000.
Mitigation
The defendant is aged 25 and is single. He was educated up to Form 5 level. After quitting school the defendant had worked as a depot attendant and a technician earning about HK$15,000 at the time.
At the time of the offence the defendant was living with his family and his girlfriend. The girlfriend has, since the defendant’s arrest, left him.
The defendant has got one previous conviction record in June 2009. On that occasion he was sent to the rehabilitation centre for the offence of claiming to be a member of a triad society.
Miss Lee for the defendant informed the court that the defendant came to know a man, surname ‘Wong’, in 2004. In 2008, the defendant started his red wine business and he contacted Wong as the latter had a wide social network.
Later, the defendant incurred gambling and business debts of about HK$200,000, and Wong helped him out by lending him money.
Miss Lee told the court that as the defendant felt he owed Wong a favour, he foolishly committed the present offence by agreeing to deliver the drug for a reward of HK$100 per delivery. Letters written by the defendant’s parents and his church’s executive secretary, as well as some certificates in respect of the defendant’s participation involuntary service and development programmes were given to the court.
In brief, the defendant was described as a good-natured person who is willing to assist others.
It was said that the defendant was led astray by his undesirable peers and owing to his misguided loyalty he committed the present offence.
In mitigation, Miss Lee emphasised that as the defendant’s family members support him fully he stands a good chance of turning over a new leaf.
Miss Lee also pays significance on the fact that the defendant was truly remorseful and he cooperated fully with the police.
The sentence
In AG v Pedro Neil Rojas [1994] 2 HKCLR 69, it was held that the guidelines for heroin trafficking laid down in R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 were also applicable to the sentencing of cocaine trafficking.
In the case of Lau Tak Ming, trafficking between 50 and 200 grammes of heroin will attract a term of imprisonment of between 8 to 12 years.
Having considered the facts of this case and the amount of cocaine involved, I consider a starting point of 11 and 12(?) years to be appropriate.
Now after taking into account the defendant’s guilty plea, and all the mitigating factors put before me, including the special circumstances on the papers, I am going to reduce the 11½ year term to one of 6½ years. In other words, the defendant is to serve a term of 6½ years for the offence to which he pleaded guilty.