HKSAR v. LEUNG YIU WAI

 DCCC131/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 131 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely, 2.02 grammes of a powder containing 1.70 grammes of ketamine and 159.22 grammes of a powder containing 131.63 grammes of ketamine respectively. Both charges were contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.

Facts of the Case

2.  The facts of the case can be summarised as follows. On the 8 December 2009, a team of police officers carried out an anti-narcotics operation on the 13th floor of Fook Yuet House, Fortune Estate, 8 Hang Cheung Street, Cheung Sha Wan, Sham Shui Po, Kowloon. They kept the residential unit at Room 1302 (hereinafter called “the premises”) under observation.

1st Charge

3.  At 7.15 pm, the defendant emerged from his residence at the premises. He was intercepted by the police, and a body search was conducted on him. Two packets of dangerous drugs, namely, 2.02 grammes of a powder containing 1.7 grammes of ketamine were found in the front left pocket of his jacket. The defendant admitted that the drugs were ketamine and it was his intention to sell these drugs to his friends and others, and he asked for a chance.

2nd Charge

4.  The police gained entry to the premises by using keys found on the defendant. Inside the premises, they found the defendant’s 29-year-old cousin. Upon search, one electronic scale, a pile of empty transparent resealable plastic bags, one electronic scale, three batteries and a paper box containing 12 packets of dangerous drugs, namely, 159.22 grammes of a powder containing 131.63 grammes of ketamine.

5.  Under caution, the defendant admitted that the dangerous drugs found inside the premises were ketamine, and he intended to sell to his customers for $10,000-odd. He had used the electronic scales and transparent resealable plastic bags for weighing and packing the ketamine for sale. The defendant also revealed that he had purchased those drugs from a male person at a price of $10,000 two days prior to his arrest.

Background of the Case and Mitigation of the Defendant

6.  The defendant, aged 22, was living with his parents and two younger brothers at the premises in question. He has two previous convictions, one of which was drugs-related. A suspended sentence was imposed on him in February 2010 for drugs found on him on 27 November 2009. Whilst on police bail for the said offence and in less than two weeks’ time, he committed the present offences of trafficking in a large quantity of ketamine.

7.  The defendant left school after completion of his Form 3 education. His working pattern was unstable and could never secure a job for long. Due to undesirable influence by his peers, he became a drug addict. For his obsession with material things and greed, the defendant naturally and willingly became a drug trafficker. Eventually, he was caught for trafficking in dangerous drugs, the subject matter of this case.

8.  Defendant was 21 years old at the time of the offences. He was young but could not be considered as a person of extreme youth. The offences he was convicted of were declared to be an excepted offence under the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Chapter 221. Under these circumstances and according to section 109A(1A) of the same ordinance, when sentencing the defendant to imprisonment, the court does not have to consider other appropriate method of dealing with the defendant. Although the present case was committed whilst the defendant was on police bail for a drug-related offence, this court would not treat this as an aggravating element so as to raise its starting point.

Sentence Tariff

9.  The guidelines for trafficking in ketamine were set out clearly in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLR 1. For 50 to 300 grammes of ketamine, 6 to 9 years of imprisonment would be the normal tariff.

10.  The Background of the case and of the Defendant, the quantity and nature of drugs involved, mitigation put forward by the defence solicitor, sentencing guidelines and totality principle were fully considered. The total quantity of ketamine in this case was 133.33 grammes. This court would therefore adopt a starting point of 75 months. After application of one-third discount for his plea, the sentence will be reduced to 50 months’ imprisonment for the total quantity of ketamine involved.

11.  Hence, the sentence of the two charges is as follows. Charge 1, starting point of 18 months will be reduced one-third to 12 months; Charge 2, starting point of 75 months will be reduced one-third to 50 months’ imprisonment. Both are to run concurrently.

12.  For his co-operation with the police, this court is prepared to further reduce his sentence by 3 months. As such, the defendant has to serve a total sentence of 47 months’ imprisonment.