HKSAR v. HOANG GIA LONG

DCCC 1096/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1096 OF 2016

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely, 23.4 grammes of a solid containing 20.2 grammes of cocaine.

Summary of Facts

2.  At around 1030 pm on 6 September 2016, the police entered a flat in Tuen Mun and found the defendant was with a female therein.  The police searched the flat and found a white sports shoe containing the drugs in question.  The estimated street value of the drugs seized was $26,000.  He was arrested for trafficking in dangerous drugs.  At the time of his arrest, he had $100 and one mobile phone with him.

3.  The defendant’s urine specimen collection two days after the arrest tested negative for drugs. 

4.  On the same day, in a video record cautioned interview, the defendant said that he picked up the drugs from the ground near San Hui Wet Market, and he placed it in the shoe as he did not want anyone to know about it.  And today, he admitted possession of those drugs seized for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Previous Conviction

5.  The defendant has a clear record.

Mitigation

6.  The defendant is aged 36, married with two young children, came to Hong Kong in 2014.  He is now a torture claimant.  The defence told this court that the defendant was an occasional drug abuser when he had money.  He bought the drugs in question when his family sent him the money from Vietnam, and he would consume some of the drugs in question.

Sentence

7.  The drug concerned is 20.2 grammes of cocaine, and the applicable sentencing guideline is HKSAR v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370.  For the quantity between 10 to 50 grammes, it falls into the sentencing bracket of 5 to 8 years’ imprisonment.

8.  In the present case, the defence said that 2 grammes of the drugs were for his consumption and asked this court to adopt a lower starting point.  I refuse.  Firstly, the urine specimens sample collected two days after arrest indicated negative for all drugs. Secondly, under caution, the defendant did not mention anything about self-consumption.

9.  This case had been set down for trial previously but was adjourned for other reason.  Today, the defendant pleaded guilty to the charge.  As stated in the case of Ngo Van Nam CACC 418/2014 and 327/2015 that the defendant is no longer entitled to one-third discount but rather a 20 per cent discount. 

10.  I adopt a starting point of 5 years 7 months.  Deducted by 20 per cent, I round up to 53 months.  That is a term of 4 years 5 months’ imprisonment.