HKSAR v. TUEN KING YUEN

DCCC 1048/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.1048 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, admitted to the summary of facts and was duly convicted.

Facts

2.  The defendant was intercepted at around 8:20pm of 26^th April 2011 when he came out from an office premises in Cheong Tai Commercial Building at Sheung Wan.

3.  The Police then searched the office premises in execution of a search warrant. The Police found a key on the defendant and used it to open a locked drawer of one of the desks in the office and found a green paper box. Inside the box were a large number of empty transparent re-sealable plastic bags and a total of 24.69g of a powder containing 17.59g of ketamine.

4.  The defendant remained silent after his arrest and caution. In a later interview, the defendant said that the seized ketamine was for his own consumption, that he bought the ketamine from a male named Ah Fung for $2,000 in the North Point area. The defendant said he used the empty plastic bags and plastic spoon to evenly separate the ketamine to avoid overdose. The defendant also claimed that he had a habit of taking 1 small packet of ketamine in 2 to 3 days.

5.  The estimated street value of all the drug found is $2,789.67.

6.  In the last paragraph of the summary of facts, it is stated that the defendant at all material times possessed all the drug found for the purpose of trafficking. The defendant had been told to listen carefully to the summary of facts and he chose to admit to those facts after confirming that he understood what had been read to him.

Previous convictions

7.  The defendant has 3 previous convictions, with one relating to the possession of dangerous drugs in 2007 when he was sentenced to 3 months’ suspended sentence and fined $3,000.

Mitigation

8.  The defendant is 26 and was born in Hong Kong. He is single and lives with his family. The defendant’s father is now 56 years old and a part time decoration worker earning about $500-600 per day, $10,000 per month. The defendant’s mother, 49, is a housewife and stays at home to look after the family. The defendant’s elder brother is 27 and suffers from schezophrenia and therefore unable to work. Since 2010 the brother has to live in a half-way hostel and be taken care of by social worker. The defendant’s younger sister is 24 and is a waitress earning about $10,000 per month.

9.  The defendant is educated up to form 5 level. After graduation, heattended a course of email logistic management for 8 months. Since then he had worked as a PVC clerk, an assistant merchandiser, a shipping and a trading clerk. In November 2008, he was employed by the present employer as a sales representative, earning about $12,000 per month. The defendant used to give his family about $6,000 per month.

10.  In Feb 2011, the defendant separated with his girlfriend. He was upset and had to rely on ketamine. He bought the ketamine for $2,000 from a person known as Ah Fung. He intended to use it for self-consumption and sell the rest to others in order to earn some money. This is of course slightly different to what the defendant had admitted to in the summary of facts about how the ketamine found in the paper box were all for the purpose of trafficking.

11.  Letters of mitigation written by the defendant, his family and his employer were submitted. It would appear from those letters that the defendant has been a good son and a good employee.

12.  Lastly, it was pointed out that the defendant was cooperative with the investigation officers. He pleaded guilty, saving court’s time. The amount the defendant would earn from the Ketamine would be less than $800, which is the difference between the purchase price and the market value of the drugs.

Sentencing tariffs

13.  In the case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng (許守城) [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, CAAR7/2006, the Court of Appeal indicated the following tariff for sentence after trial for traffickers in ketamine:

“(3) 10 to 50 grammes – 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment;”

Sentence

14.  Having heard and considered the defendant’s mitigation carefully, I will first of all adopt a starting point of 51 months’ imprisonment based on the amount of ketamine. I will grant the defendant a discount of around 20% based on his circumstances. I will then grant him the full one third discount for his guilty plea.

15.  The final sentence for the charge that the defendant had pleaded guilty to is that of 26 months’ imprisonment.