COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug and one count of manufacturing a dangerous drug, contrary to sections 4 and 6 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance respectively. He is committed to this court for sentence.
In the evening of 27 November 2021, the defendant was intercepted by police officers in Mong Kok. Upon a search, 20 packets containing 2.87 grammes of heroin were found on him. The defendant was led back to his residence for a search. The room was searched, and no suspicious item was found.
The defendant revealed another place of residence to the police. He was then led by the police to that 2nd residence for a house search. Inside that residence, 385.37 grammes of heroin, 123.51 grammes of methamphetamine and 7.36 grammes of herbal cannabis, chemicals, drug paraphernalia and apparatus were found.
Government chemist confirmed that the chemicals and apparatus found were items commonly used in alteration and manufacturing of methamphetamine.
The street value of all the dangerous drugs in question was estimated to be over HK$2,000,000.
The defendant is 69, educated up to Primary 6 level. Prior to his arrest, he was unemployed. He has 13 criminal convictions, 6 relating to the offence of dangerous drug in nature.
Given the circumstances of his arrest and the seizure of the drugs, Counts 1 and 2 could be treated as one continuous incident and would therefore be sentenced on such basis. In this case, the amount of herbal cannabis found was small. It therefore could be ignored for the purpose of sentencing.
Counsel from both sides have kindly agreed that the notional starting point under various tests, based on quantity alone, would be one of 18 years’ imprisonment.
In this case, although the defendant was not the mastermind behind the operation, he was also not simply acting as a courier. Essentially, he was running a manufacturing and distribution centre. Further, three different kinds of dangerous drugs were found. As I have just mentioned, the defendant also has a number of criminal convictions, 6 relating to drug offence. As such, the notional starting point would be enhanced to one of 21 years’ imprisonment.
It was, however, pointed out by Mr Lo that it was upon the defendant’s voluntary revelation that the police was able to search and locate the 2nd residence, where drugs and apparatus were found. Given that, a 1 year discount will be given. As such, the starting point for Counts 1 and 2 would be one of 20 years’ imprisonment.
The defendant is entitled to the full one-third discount for his earliest plea. For Counts 1 and 2, he is therefore sentenced to 13 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
Given what I have just said about the sentence, in relation to Count 3, it is subsumed into the sentences imposed on Counts 1 and 2. For Count 3, the defendant is therefore likewise sentenced to 13 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
For the three counts of offences the defendant stands convicted, he is therefore sentenced to a concurrent sentence of 13 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.