HKSAR v. LI WING SUM

DCCC241/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 241 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

The charge

1. The defendant pleaded guilty to a count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 12.68 grammes of a powder containing 8.2 grammes of ketamine.  Such offence was contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of  the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

The Facts

2. The facts of this case can be summarised as follows.

3. At around 2.28 am on 4 February 2012, the police saw the defendant acting furtively inside a convenience store located at Fu Heng Shopping Centre at Fu Heng Estate, Taipo.  The defendant was searched by a woman police constable at the toilet for the disabled on the 1st Floor, Fu Heng Shopping Centre.

4. Upon search, a red packet containing 20 resealable plastic bags which contained a total of 12.68 grammes of a powder containing 8.2 grammes of ketamine was found in defendant’s brassiere, whereas a plastic spoon with traces of powder was found in defendant’s handbag.

5. The defendant was subsequently arrested.  She had cash of $72 and two mobile phones with her during arrest.  Under caution, the defendant admitted that she had purchased the ketamine from a friend at $900 on 3 February 2012.  She then packed the ketamine into 20 transparent plastic bags and she intended to sell the ketamine to earn money for purchasing milk powder for her two-year-old son.

6. The estimated street value of the drug seized was HK$1,000.

The defendant’s background and mitigation

7. The defendant was 19 years old at the time of the offence and had been unemployed for six months.  She was single and a mother of a baby boy aged 1½ years old.  She was convicted for a shoplifting offence in 2007 and 18 months Probation Order was imposed as a result. 

8. Unfortunately, she did not treasure the chance given, and was sentenced to Rehabilitation Centre for breach of such order in March 2008.  Five months later, she was discharged from the Rehabilitation Centre on 8 August 2009 and almost immediately she was pregnant by her boyfriend and gave birth to a baby boy in May 2010. 

9. Apparently, the defendant was not rehabilitated and had not reformed herself at all.  She did not learn from her past misdeeds. Eventually, she ended up in a trafficking offence, a more serious offence in nature by selling drugs to the public and had caused grave harm to the society.  Such case needs to be dealt with rigorously.  At the age of 19 and at the time of the offence the defendant should have thought of her family situation should she be arrested.    

Sentencing guidelines

10. The present offence is an excepted offence.  This court is aware that the restriction on imprisonment of young persons and under section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap.221, would therefore not apply in this case. 

11. Sentence guideline for trafficking in ketamine after trial was laid down by the Court of Appeal in SJ v Hii Siew Cheng CAAR7/2006.  It was held that 1 to 10 grammes of ketamine would warrant a 2 to 4 years’ imprisonment.  There was no justification for any departure from the said sentencing tariff. 

Sentence

12. The quantity of pure ketamine involved in this case was slightly over 8 grammes.  Having fully considered the background of the case and of the defendant, the mitigation advanced by the defence lawyer, the severity of the offence and the sentencing guideline set up by the Court of Appeal, this court considered that a starting point of 42 months’ imprisonment would be appropriate.   

13. The defendant is entitled to a one-third discount for her guilty plea and to have her sentence reduced to 28 months’ imprisonment.  As there were no circumstances which would justify further reduction in sentence, this court therefore imposes a 28 months’ imprisonment.