HKSAR v. WONG SIU CHUN

HCCC 97/2018

[2018] HKCFI 1570

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 97 OF 2018

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty before a magistrate to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. In sentencing, I have considered the whole circumstances of the case, including its nature and facts, in particular, the type and quantity of the dangerous drugs involved, the background of the defendant and mitigation put forward on his behalf.

The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. The defendant was stopped on the street, and upon search, the following items were found in his rucksack:

(1) A biscuit paper box, inside which was a bag containing a substantial quantity of ‘Ice’;

(2) A metal box, inside which five bags of ‘Ice’ and seven bags of cocaine were;

(3) A plastic box containing three bags of cannabis in herbal form;

(4) An electronic scale;

(5) Many empty resealable plastic bags; and

(6) Two devices for consuming dangerous drug.

The defendant was arrested. Under caution he said he distributed dangerous drug only because he was in need of money. However, in a subsequent interview, he denied having said the above statement. He said he had no knowledge of the ‘Ice’ found in the biscuit box and the cannabis. He also says the other quantity of ‘Ice’ and cocaine found were for his own consumption. The defendant now admits that he was trafficking in all the dangerous drugs found.

The total quantity of the dangerous drugs found in the defendant’s possession were 149.98 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 144.13 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride; 1.20 grammes of a solid containing 1.09 grammes of cocaine; and 34.1 grammes of cannabis in herbal form.

I was told that the defendant is now 26 years of age. He received education up to Form 4, and had worked as a construction site worker and a sushi apprentice and a cook. He had been convicted once before. In 2016 for an offence of possession of dangerous drug, he was sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment.

Learned counsel for the defence, Mr Luk, urged the court to accept that the defendant is truly remorseful and is determined to turn over a new leaf. He informed the court that after his discharge from prison for the last conviction, the defendant had worked very hard to start a new life and had been supporting the grandparents who brought him up after his parents divorced during his very young age. He even moved to avoid meeting the bad peers. However, he could not continue his work in the construction site after an injury at work.

As a result, his income dropped substantially and rather than able to support his grandparents, it became the other way round. In the difficult financial circumstances, he came across the bad friends again and was lured to commit the present offence for a reward of $1,500 which he has not yet received. With the support and love of the family, the defendant is determined to rehabilitate. He had made arrangements to start study so that he can sit the DSE. The defence submitted a letter written by the defendant himself in which he expressed remorse, as well as letters written by family members who speak well of the defendant and plead leniency on his behalf.

There were three different types of dangerous drugs which the defendant trafficked in. Amongst these types of drugs, ‘Ice’ was obviously the most prominent type, both in terms of quantity and seriousness of harm. In consideration of the appropriate sentence, I accept that combined approach should be adopted. The Court of Appeal held in HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLR 691, that in the case of trafficking in ‘Ice’, where the narcotic content was between 70 to 300 grammes, the sentence would range from 11 years to 15 years’ imprisonment.

The quantity of ‘Ice’ alone attracts a starting point of about 12 years and 3 months. The quantity of cocaine involved was very small. The quantity of cannabis in herbal form was also very small and attracts only a light sentence. At the same time, I have to bear in mind the aggravating feature of trafficking in two types of dangerous drugs. Taking this into account, I am of the view that a starting point of 12 years and 9 months would have been appropriate.

The defendant pleaded guilty before a magistrate and therefore is entitled to a one-third discount. In all the circumstances, having regard to everything which learned counsel said on the defendant’s behalf, I am of the view that this is the extent of discount the defendant is entitled to. So, defendant, please stand up.

For the above said reasons, I sentence you to an imprisonment term of 8½ years.