HKSAR v. PANG KA HING

DCCC 437/2019

[2019] HKDC 1444

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 437 OF 2019

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.  The defendant, 34, pleaded guilty before me to 3 counts of offence, namely,

Charge 1	:	Drug trafficking (2.23g of a solid containing 1.83g of cocaine);
Charge 2	:	Possession of drug inhaling device (one plastic bottle with a plastic straw and a metal tube with metal gauze inside);
Charge 3	:	Possession of prohibited weapons[1] (two sets of Chinese-style fighting irons and a spring-loaded knife).

2.  In the evening on 22 February 2019, the defendant came out of his flat in King Lam Estate, Tseung Kwan O to go to the rear staircase where he was going to sell drugs to another person, but before he could do that he was stopped by the police. Police officers found from his jacket pocket a plastic bag containing 11 plastic bags of cocaine.

3.  Government chemist later confirmed that the drugs in question are 2.23g of a solid containing 1.83g of cocaine with an estimated street value of about $2,500.

4.  Also found on him a small amount of cash and a mobile phone. He was arrested for drug trafficking and under caution, he told the officers that the drugs were for his own consumption.

5.  The defendant was then taken back to his residence for a search. On the computer desk in his bedroom, officers found an inhaling device as particularized in charge 2 with some liquid in it and 2 electronic scales plus a large number of resealable plastic bags.

6.  The liquid was subsequently examined and found to contain traces of cocaine.

7.  Police officers also found in his bedroom the prohibited weapons as particularized in charge 3 from an ornament cupboard. He said to the officers, “I bought the weapons online because they were pretty, I bought them for my own collection.” 

8.  The defendant has 12 previous convictions: his first conviction is attempt to obtain property by deception in 2002 for which he was put on probation, but his subsequent criminal behavior (mainly violent in nature) landed him in the training center, and his last conviction is attempt to export prohibited articles in 2016 for which he was sent to prison for 10  weeks.  It is worth mentioning that he has no prior convictions relating to any types of drugs.

9.  The defendant, single, only received education up to junior secondary school.  He used to work as a cashier in a recycling company but at the time of the offence, he had been out of job for 2 years. There is a story behind it.

10.  The court heard that the defendant, who had been a drug addict for over 15 years, had participated in self-harming behavior due to substance abuse – he had twice chopped off his left palm in 2011 and 2012. First time the surgery was a success, but not the second one; he has lost his left palm permanently ever since.

11.  Counsel for the defendant said in his written submission that the defendant was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2017 but he did not receive any medical treatment and his latest health condition remained a mystery. I asked counsel about the defendant’s current health condition, counsel said the doctor only told the defendant that it was a suspected case of lung cancer, and as his health did not seem to deteriorate, the defendant did not seek any medical treatment.

12.  As a long-time drug user, the defendant was constantly in need of money to finance his drug habit, and as a result he turned to sell drugs to make quick money, counsel said, the defendant bought the drugs in this case for $2,000 and intended to resell it for $2,500.

13.  Defence counsel made it clear that the defendant is not relying on part-consumption to seek further reduction in sentence.

14.  As far as the weapons are concerned, same as he had told the officers that they were bought for keepsake, he had no intention whatsoever to use it to hurt anyone.

15.  For the offence of drug trafficking, I take 30 months as the starting point, and for possessing inhaling device, 9 months. 

16.  Regarding the weapons offence, although the defendant said he had the weapons for collection only, there is always the risk of some of these weapons finding its way into the wrong hand, then someone might be hurt.

17.  The weapons offence carries a maximum fine up to $10,000 and a prison term up to 3 years. Given the facts of the present case, I take 12 months as the starting point.

18.  Insofar as the mitigation is concerned, apart from his guilty pleas there is not anything of substance. The defendant’s pleas, however, are timely, so he is entitled to a full one third discount. Giving the appropriate discount, the starting point is reduced to 20 months, 6 months and 8 months for charges 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

19.  Taking into account the totality principle, I order that charge 1 should run concurrently with charge 2 but consecutively to 4 months of charge 3, the total term is one of 24 months’ imprisonment.