HKSAR v. YU LIK HANG

DCCC1178/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1178 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two offences of trafficking in dangerous drugs, each contrary to sections 4(1)(a) & (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.

2.  You admitted the brief facts and I convicted you.  The facts were as follows. 

3.  At about 2105 hours on 5 September of this year, PW1 and PW2, police officers, saw you come out from Room 2903 of Wing Tong House, Yau Tong Estate, Kowloon.  They intercepted and searched you.  PW1 found 4 packets of ketamine total 21.27 grammes of ketamine (Exhibit P1) in your right front trousers pocket, also four keys, two mobile phones and $5,880. 

4.  Under caution you admitted conveying the ketamine for others.  With your permission they entered and searched Room 2903.  You told them that ketamine was stored inside a drawer of your computer desk.  Based on this information, they seized a plastic bag which was used to contain 13 packets of ketamine and one plastic bag containing electronic scales and other plastic bags.

5.  Under caution you admitted to keeping the ketamine in the plastic bag.  You were taken to the police station where you made a video recorded interview under caution and you admitted the following:

(i) helping another to deliver the ketamine for money;

(ii) receiving a call at 1800 hours on that day and a request from a friend to go downstairs and collect a black bag;

(iii) inside the bag was dangerous drugs, scales, plastic bags and a mobile phone;

(iv) you brought the bag to your home and divided the dangerous drugs into 17 smaller bags;

(v) at 2100 hours on that day, you received a call from a friend and a request to bring four packets to Mongkok;

(vi) you received $100 for carrying each packet;

(vii) the $5,880 was salary of your part-time job.

6.  Analysis of the drugs revealed the following: of what was P1 was four plastic bags containing 53.13 grammes of powder containing 21.27 grammes of ketamine; P7, 13 plastic bags containing 170.94 grammes of a powder containing 80.38 grammes of ketamine.  The total ketamine involved was 101.65 grammes.  You possessed the ketamine for trafficking.     

7.  You are a man of hitherto clear record.  Mr Wong entered mitigation on your behalf.  He told me that you are 23 years of age, educated to Form 3 and a causal restaurant worker.  He emphasised your clear record.  He conceded that for this type of offence there is little that he could say.  He drew to my attention that various members of your family were present in court to support you.  He told me that your parents had separated when you were young, so you had been brought up by your grandmother who you were very close to.   But unfortunately, she is now suffering from cancer and is 84 years of age.   

8.  You hope to be able to see her on release.  Well, for what it’s worth, Defendant, I hope you get your wish.  Mr Wong told me that you are very remorseful and regretted your foolishness.

9.  You committed the offence out of economic necessity.  He emphasised that you had been very cooperative with the police showing them where the drugs were stored.  By way of remuneration you received $100 for each packet delivered, a total of $2,000.

10.  His instructions were that it was the first time you had been involved in this sort of activity.  On release you hope to take up driving and join your father in his business.  Mr Wong also produced four letters with the translations which you referred me to.  One of those letters was written by yourself.  He concluded his mitigation by asking for leniency on your behalf. 

11.  I turn now to the sentence.  I do wonder in these circumstances why there needs to be two charges laid against you instead of simply one charge of trafficking in 101.65 grammes of ketamine.  It is something perhaps the prosecution should consider in these circumstances.  It is different where the offences are days apart and where the location is a long way away, but this was clearly part of one transaction.  Having said that, it is not a serious criticism.

12.  Turning now to the specifics.  Trafficking in dangerous drugs is serious, it is reprehensible and it will not be tolerated by the court.  Here, we are dealing with a substantial amount of ketamine, over 100 grammes.  As you had been advised this places it within the sentencing range of 6 to 9 years.

13.  In your favour there is substantial mitigation.  I take note of your clear record, your relative youth, the family support that you enjoy; that in itself is important because it means when you are released there will be support in the community for you.  I was very impressed by the high level of cooperation that you extended to the police upon arrest.  This is very sensible and very mature.  I note that not only did you make full admissions but you also directed the police to where you were storing the ketamine.

14.  I do have some sympathy with you and your family.  Having said that, these offences do call for substantial prison sentences.  I do intend to be as lenient as my public duty will allow, and then grouping the drugs together I am going to take a starting point which is the very lowest end of the scale.

15.  Nonetheless, I have to impose proper sentences for each charge.  Charge 1, I take a starting point of 4½ years reduced to 3 years for your plea of guilty.  Charge 2, I take a starting point of 6 years reduced to 4 years for your plea of guilty.  These two sentences will be served concurrently making a total of 4 years’ imprisonment.