HKSAR v. WONG KING HANG

HCCC 339/2024

[2025] HKCFI 2298

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 339 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The Charge

1.  On 17 October 2024, the defendant pleaded guilty in the magistracy to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.  The count involved 23.72 kilogrammes of a solid containing 18.568 kilogrammes of cocaine.  On the same day, the defendant admitted a Summary of Facts dated 15 October 2024 and he was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentencing.  Today, before this Court, the defendant confirmed his guilty plea to the trafficking count and his admission of the Summary of Facts.

Facts Admitted

2.  The facts of the case can be summarized as follows. 

3.  In the afternoon on 10 September 2023, Customs officers observed the defendant pushing a trolley out of the basement carpark of Tower 3A, Emerald Bay, in So Kwun Wat, Tuen Mun. They intercepted the defendant and upon enquiry, the defendant said he had come from Flat E on 22/F (“the Flat”).  Customs officers escorted the defendant back to the Flat and the defendant opened the door to the Flat by using his thumb print.  Customs officers searched the Flat and found there, inter alia, 24 plastic bags containing 23.72 kilogrammes of a solid containing 18.568 kilogrammes of cocaine.

4.  The defendant was arrested and under caution, he admitted that the plastic bags contained dangerous drugs, that there were 24 blocks and one of them was soda powder.  The defendant also admitted that the drugs belonged to him and they were for distribution.

5.  Customs officers also found in the Flat, inter alia, a webcam, an electronic scale, a plastic box, some newspapers, a cutter, two recycle bags, one bundle of wrapping materials, two metal trays, one bowl, one bundle of ziplock bags and one sealing machine.  The defendant admitted that some of the items seized were packaging tools.

6.  Customs officers also found in the Flat a tenancy agreement in which the defendant was named as the tenant.

7.  The webcam found in the Flat was found to have recordings capturing the defendant weighing, wrapping and sealing packets of drugs.

8.  Inspection of the defendant’s mobile phones revealed his WhatsApp conversations with an unknown person on 10 September 2023 during which the defendant sent out a number of photographs depicting the packaged drugs.

9.  The defendant admitted that he possessed the dangerous drugs seized for the purpose of trafficking.

10.  The estimated street value of the dangerous drugs seized was HK$26,115,720.

Background and Mitigation

11.  Born in Hong Kong, the defendant was aged 33 at the time of the offence and he is now 34 years old.  He had received up to Form 4 education and then he left school and took up various jobs afterwards. He lost his full-time job as a warehouse supervisor at the end of 2022 due to the covid pandemic and he could only find part-time jobs prior to his arrest for the present offence.  Because of that, he was desperate for money and he turned to gambling and started to incur debts. He was then manipulated by the drug dealer to act as a storekeeper of the dangerous drugs.

12.  The defendant got married in 2015, had a daughter in 2016 but divorced in 2022.  Prior to his arrest, he was living with a girlfriend and they had plans to get married and start a new family together.

13.  The defendant has a clear record. 

14.  Through his counsel Ms Yip, the defendant has submitted a letter written by himself, one by his fiancée, one by his mother and one by the workmate of the defendant’s mother who is a good friend of the family.  In his own letter, he expressed shamefulness and full regrets for having caused all the trouble to his family and fiancée.  On the other hand, it can be seen from their letters that despite his offending and detention, the defendant has the full support from his family and his fiancée and they all pleaded for the Court’s leniency.

15.  Ms Yip submitted that being overwhelmed by his gambling debts and financial pressure, the defendant foolishly followed the instructions given by the drug dealer to rent the Flat and to pack and store the dangerous drugs there.  The Court was invited to assess the defendant’s role as no more than a storekeeper who was involved in packaging and storing the dangerous drugs for distribution.

Sentence

16.  In sentencing the defendant, I will follow the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, bearing in mind also the Court of Appeal’s guidance in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.

17.  The first step is to identify the relevant guideline band applicable to the quantity of the dangerous drugs in question.  In the present case, Ms Yip accepted that with the total quantity of 18.568 kilogrammes of cocaine, the starting point should be about 27 years and 8 months’ imprisonment: see HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] 2 HKLRD 138 at §62.  That starting point is also confirmed by Mr. Ng Wing Kit, counsel acting for the prosecution.

18.  The second step is to assess the role and culpability of the defendant based upon the Summary of Facts before the Court.  In short, the dangerous drugs were packaged and stored by the defendant at the Flat for distribution to others.

19.  The third step is to decide where within the relevant guideline band the defendant should come.  In my assessment, the defendant’s role was no more than that of a storekeeper cum courier.

20.  The fourth step is to deal with aggravating factors, if any.  The defendant has a clear record and but for the huge quantity of drugs involved in the present case, I can see no applicable aggravating factor.

21.  The fifth step is to take into account the mitigating factors, if any.  As accepted by Ms. Yip, given the seriousness of the trafficking offence, the only mitigating factor in the defendant’s case is his guilty plea which was entered at the earliest opportunity.  Because of that, he is entitled to a full one-third discount.  Given his guilty plea, I will reduce the sentence from 27 years and 8 months’ imprisonment by one third and round it off to 18 years and 5 months’ imprisonment. 

22.  Lastly, I consider this sentence fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.  Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for 18 years and 5 months.

Exhibits

23.  Order in terms of the Prosecution’s application, not objected to by the Defence, was granted.