CRIMINAL CASE NO. 13 OF 2012
COURT: Defendant, you were convicted after trial of one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. In sentencing, I have considered the whole
circumstances of the case, including its nature and facts, in particular the type and quantity of the dangerous drug involved, your background and mitigation put forward on your behalf.
The facts of the case are simple. On the evening of 25 October 2011, about 8.05 pm, you drove a Honda private car to a place near Sun Yuen Long Centre and parked it alongside the pavement on Long Lok Road. You were the only person in the car. Having stayed inside the car for about 10 minutes, you got down and walked to and fro on the pavement next to the car.
Then police officers approached you, stopped you and searched you. A police officer found a black plastic bag tucked inside your waistband. Inside this bag was another transparent, resealable plastic bag containing white powder. Upon further search, items, including the key of the car, were found on your person.
Then a search was conducted on the Honda car. Inside the car boot was found a brown paper document envelope containing four transparent, resealable plastic bags, each of which contained white powder. Upon further search of the car, the officer found, at the front passenger seat, four brown paper document envelopes. Inside each of these envelopes was a large transparent, resealable plastic bag. Inside of each of these large transparent, resealable plastic bags were six transparent, resealable plastic bags each containing white powder. There were, therefore, a total of 24 transparent, resealable plastic bags containing white powder.
The above said white powder found was later confirmed to be a substance containing ketamine. To be exact, there was a total of 7.19 kilogrammes of powder containing 2.67 kilogrammes of ketamine the subject matter of the count.
A wallet containing your identity card and other items bearing your name was also found inside the car.
I was told that you are 52 years of age. You are married but often live in the mainland, apart from your wife. You had earned your living as a taxi driver. I was told that you could no longer drive since June 2011, after having met with a traffic accident. Indeed, this was the second traffic accident you met with last year.
You are not a first-time offender. You have five convictions, including one for possession of dangerous drugs which was also ketamine, I was told. However, none of these were of serious nature. You have never been imprisoned. The last conviction took place in 1987, almost 25 years ago. These records have little impact on your sentence.
Your counsel, Mr Percy, urged me to take into account that you have been a hard-working man; it was only the unfortunate traffic accident which prevented you from working as a taxi driver. He also asked me to take into account that although you were, to a substantial degree, living apart from your wife, your wife and daughter still support you. Both of them have written to the court, asking for leniency on your behalf.
The dangerous drug you trafficked in was ketamine. The total narcotic content was 2.67 kilogrammes. The Court of Appeal suggested, in the case SJ v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, that a sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment and upward should be considered for trafficking in ketamine if the narcotic content is over 1,000 grammes. In all the circumstances, I do not find there are good grounds to depart from the tariff.
I also bear in mind the case HKSAR v Leung Wai Man, CACC24/2007, in which the Court of Appeal stressed that a sentencing court should avoid using arithmetical progression in sentencing. Instead, the court should exercise its discretion according to the circumstances of the case. In all the circumstances, in my judgment, a starting point of 15 years is appropriate and sufficient.
I have considered the whole circumstances including what Mr Percy has said on your behalf. I note that you have managed to keep out of trouble for 25 years and you are now 52 years old. However, I do not think they are matters which go to justify a discount in sentence.
By reason of the matters aforesaid, I sentence you to 15 years’ imprisonment.