HKSAR v. AHMED MOHAMMED AZAD

DCCC511/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 511 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Ahmed Mohammed Azad, I acquitted you of the charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs but convicted you of the alternative offence of possession of the drugs in question.

2.  Although a number of matters were in issue in this trial, it is common ground that you went to the Yau Ma Tei Jockey Club Clinic in Yau Ma Tei on the evening of 27 March this year, bringing with you a plastic bag containing 18.57 grammes of a mixture containing 11.39 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.  It is an admitted fact that those drugs could have had a market value of more than $14,000.

3.  You allege that you believed that you had a smaller quantity of heroin in your possession as you believed that you had just purchased 5 grammes from a dealer for your own consumption and that at the time of the transaction the dealer had told you that, because on a prior occasion he had sold you some substandard drugs, he would give you a little bit extra. 

4.  Having heard your evidence, I found I could not completely exclude the possibility that out of a grudge, the dealer had given you a greater quantity of drugs than you believed you were getting and had then informed the police.  I must sentence you on the basis that you believed you had a little more than 5 grammes in your possession for your own consumption. 

5.  As I was obliged by statute, I adjourned the matter so that a report could be prepared as to your suitability for drug addiction treatment centre.

6.  The medical officer is of the opinion that you are not a drug dependent and are therefore not suitable for drug addiction treatment centre.  I am satisfied, bearing in mind the facts of this case and also the fact that you have been before the courts on previous occasions for drug offences, that there is no alternative but to sentence you to a term of imprisonment.

7.  I adopt an initial starting point of 18 months’ imprisonment.  I have gone on to consider to what extent that starting point should be enhanced to take into account the latent risk that you might be tempted to traffic in those drugs.  Despite the fact that you may have believed that you only had just over 5 grammes in your possession, I am satisfied that even if that had been all you had on you, there is still a high chance you would have decided to traffic in the drugs.

8.  On your account, you were a drug addict.  It was your evidence that the money you needed to buy these drugs represented all the money that you then had.  Bearing in mind that you still needed to feed yourself, there would have been a high risk that you would have sold at least part of the drugs you had bought even if, as you claim you believed you had only bought just over 5 grammes.  Even on that basis, the drugs would have had a possible street value of around $4,000. 

9.  What is more, you are somebody who has trafficked in dangerous drugs before.  The temptation to do it again would be very great.  I notice that you told the officer who compiled the drug addiction treatment centre report that the reason that you had trafficked in dangerous drugs previously was that the money you were receiving from your father was not enough for your daily drug consumption, and it was for that reason that you had started to traffic in dangerous drugs. 

10.  I accordingly enhance the starting point by 3 months to reflect the latent risk of you trafficking in these drugs.  That means that the overall starting point I adopt is one of 21 months’ imprisonment.  You were prepared to admit to possession of these drugs at the start of the trial, and for that reason, you are entitled to the usual discount of one‑third.  I accordingly sentence you to 14 months’ imprisonment.