COURT: Defendant, please stand up.
The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to traffic in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance and section 159A and 159C of the Crimes Ordinance.
In the evening on 13 March 2021, the defendant was intercepted by police officers in the lobby of Tower 6 in Avon Park, Fanling. A search of the defendant by police officers found 13.3 grammes of methamphetamine, ie ‘Ice’, 17.75 grammes of ketamine and 4.71 grammes of cocaine. Under caution, the defendant admitted that he was tasked to deliver those dangerous drugs for financial rewards.
A search of an apartment on Tower 6 of the estate found an additional 696.63 grammes of ‘Ice’, 148.7 grammes of ketamine and 61.37 grammes of cocaine.
In one video interview, the defendant further admitted that he had been to that apartment to take drugs for deliveries for about 10 times and the rewards that he received for delivering those dangerous drugs was about HK$2,000. That, of course, turned out to be untrue.
With the assistance of the defendant and after examining messages in the defendant’s mobile phone, police discovered that between 1 February 2021 and 13 March 2021, the defendant had made 127 deliveries. The dangerous drugs in question involved 4,294 packages of dangerous drug which contained 962.59 grammes of ‘Ice’, 890.1 grammes of ketamine and 287.7 grammes of cocaine.
Adopting the same purity-impurity ratio test of the seizures of the drugs on the day in question, the quantities of the drugs worked out to be as follows: for ‘Ice’, 933.71 grammes; for ketamine, 747.68 grammes; and for cocaine, 258.13 grammes.
Counsel from both the prosecution as well as the defence have kindly worked out the notional starting point using various tests under different approaches would be between 21.5 years and 23 years.
The defendant is now 42, divorced, educated up to Form 2 level. He has three criminal convictions involving six offences. Two related to possession of drug and one trafficking in dangerous drug. Prior to his arrest, he was a transportation worker.
Mitigation letters from the defendant and his ex-colleagues have been produced. In essence, they ask for leniency on the defendant’s behalf. I understand their wish and I understand the wish of the defendant. However, I am bound by the sentencing guideline laid down by the Court of Appeal, so there are not a lot that I can do.
Giving the benefit of the doubt to the defendant, the notional starting point would be set at 21 years and 6 months. There are, however, aggravating features in this case, that is, this is not the defendant’s first trafficking conviction. Further, the defendant was charged for a conspiracy offence. In essence, he had been trafficking over a period of two months and over 127 occasions in dangerous drugs.
However, on the other hand, without the defendant’s assistance the police would not be able to discover the amount of drugs that the defendant was trafficking within the relevant period. In my view, the plus and the minus cancel each other out.
So, in short, 21 years and 6 months will be adopted as the ultimate starting point. The defendant, of course, is entitled to the one-third full discount.
For the offence the defendant stands convicted, he is therefore sentenced to 172 months’ imprisonment, that is 14 years and 4 months.