HKSAR v. TSANG KIN KEUNG

HCCC 58/2025

[2025] HKCFI 3530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 58 OF 2025

______________

______________

_________________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

_________________________________

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs[1]  before Magistrate Mr. Jeffrey Sze, admitted to the Summary of Facts and was committed, on 14 February 2025, to the Court of First Instance for sentence. He confirmed his plea and admission before me and the conviction was duly recorded.

2.  Particulars of the charge are that he on 18 August, 2023, outside House No.13, Wang Toi Shan Hung Mo Tam, Kam Tin Road, Pat Heung, Yuen Long, New Territories, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 862 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 855 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride (commonly referred to as ‘ice’).

FACTS

3.  The defendant was seen walking towards House No.13 (“the house”) at around 9:53pm on the charge date while holding a pink paper bag and a few plastic water pipes.  When police officers in ambush intercepted him outside the house, the defendant dropped the paper bag to the ground, which was later found to have a re-sealable plastic bag containing the dangerous drugs as particularized.

4.  Upon arrest, the defendant claimed under caution that the ‘ice’ belonged to him and that it had nothing to do with others.  He was then escorted to Flat D of the house.  Upon search, drug packaging paraphernalia were found from a plastic box placed in the corner of the living room.  They included a bundle of re-sealable plastic bags, an electronic scale, a heat sealer and a vacuum sealer.

5.  Upon examination, the defendant’s DNA was found on the pink paper bag, the said heat sealer and the said vacuum sealers seized from Flat D.

6.  The estimated street value of the dangerous drugs seized was around HK$395,658.

7.  Through his admission to the Summary of Facts, the defendant had admitted that, at all material times, he knowingly possessed all the dangerous drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.  

PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS

8.  The defendant has 8 convictions from 6 court appearances.  4 of them are drug related.  His last conviction was on 9 February 2021, when he was given a 2 month suspended sentence for one charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

BACKGROUND AND MITIGATION

9.  The defendant was born in Hong Kong and is 50 years old.  He was 48 at the time of the offence and unemployed.  He was educated up to Form 3 level.  He eventually received vocational training and worked as a welder.  At the time of the offence, he had a wage dispute with the contractor of the project he was working on, and became unemployed.  Before that, he was earning around $30,000 per month on average.

10.  The defendant was married but had separated with his wife in 2022.  They have 2 daughters aged 24 and 25.  The defendant became involved with a Ms. Chan and together they have a son who is now 2 and a half.  They were living together in Yuen Long at the time of the offence.  

11.  The defendant had been using drugs since he was 20 years old, but had only become a user of ‘ice’ in recent years.  

12.  Ms. Cannise Chan, counsel for the defendant, gave a detailed account of how the defendant came to be in possession of the drugs.  In gist, the defendant started by agreeing with a ‘Li’ to help pick up something together with a common friend, Ms Choy, from Yuen Long, and then have it brought back to ‘Li’.  

13.  When in Yuen Long, the pink bag with drugs inside was handed to Choy.  The defendant demanded to have a look and suspected it was ‘ice’.  He was not happy about being thrusted into such a situation but nevertheless drove on to deliver the bag to ‘Li’, which was at the area near House no. 13.  When they arrived, Choy immediately left and ‘Li’ came over.  The defendant scolded him for tricking him into making the drug delivery.  ‘Li’ pacified the defendant by promising him a $5,000 reward, and asked him to carry the bag of drugs to House no.13.  ‘Li’ said he will pay the defendant there via electronic payment.  It was under those circumstances that the defendant came to commit the offence, and the defendant never received any money from ‘Li’.

14.  As for what the defendant had said about the ice belonging to him and had nothing to do with others under caution, Ms. Chan submitted that the defendant said those words because he was “overwhelmed with fear and guilt at the time”, and because he heard an officer asking if a father and daughter who was seen walking with him were involved with the drugs, and so he blurted out those words.

15.  In relation to the defendant’s DNA being found on the sealers, it is Ms. Chan’s submission that the defendant had visited the occupant of Flat D, which was Ms. Choy, and consumed drugs there before since she was also a drug user.  On his first visit, he had seen the box with the sealers inside and had picked them up to have a look and asked what they were for.  Ms. Choy just said they were sealers and nothing more.  The defendant did not live in that flat, did not own the sealers and had never used them before. 

SENTENCING

16.  The maximum sentence on conviction upon indictment for trafficking in dangerous drugs is that of life imprisonment and a fine of $5 million.

17.  The sentencing approach and tariff bands as set out by the Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, and HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234 are applied as follows.

Step 1: The applicable guideline tariff bands

18.  For the 855g of ice, the applicable guideline tariff band is “16 to 20 years”.

Step 2: The defendant’s role and culpability

19.  On the basis of what the defendant had put forward through Ms. Chan about how he came to be in possession of the drugs, why he said those words under caution, and how his DNA might have come to be on the sealers is true, or may be true, I find that the defendant’s role was that of a courier of the ‘ice’ at the time of his possession of the drugs.

Step 3: The relevant band within the guidelines

20.  Based on my finding of the defendant’s role and culpability as a courier, the corresponding notional starting point is 18 years 6 months.

Step 4: Aggravating factors

21.  The fact that the defendant is a habitual offender is an aggravating factor, and for this I will enhance the sentence by 3 months, taking it to 18 years 9 months’ imprisonment.

Step 5: Mitigating factors

22.  The only mitigating factor is the defendant’s timely guilty plea, for which he will be given the usual one-third discount.

Step 6: Totality

23.  Taking a step back, I find the sentence fair, just and balanced.

FINAL SENTENCE

24.  The final sentence is, therefore, 12 years 6 months’ imprisonment after plea.