|
DCCC1106/2010
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1106 OF 2010
----------------------
----------------------
|
Date:
|
26 November 2010 at 10.10 am
|
|
Present:
|
Miss Monica Chan, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Yeung Lung-sang, Sam Lennon, of Rowdget W. Young & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
|
--------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
--------------------------
1. Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs.
2. The facts were that on 13 August 2010, the defendant was intercepted on Tai Wai Road shortly before midnight. He was found hiding at his back a packet of drinks, with 20 plastic bags totalling 10.89 grammes of powder containing 8.69 grammes of ketamine.
3. Under caution he admitted being asked by someone to deliver the drugs to Fanling to earn $500. The defendant has just turned 16 about two weeks before the offence. He has a clear record. He has attained Form 3 education and ceased afterwards.
4. Various reports have been called for before sentence. The defendant is found to be drug dependent and considered to be suitable for admission to DATC. As such, he is not suitable for detention in RC, DC nor TC. Mr Yeung urged this court to adopt the recommendation of the DATC report.
5. Trafficking in dangerous drugs is a very serious offence. The Court of Appeal in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng CAAR7/2006 had laid down tariff for traffickers in ketamine. For 1 to 10 grammes, 2 to 4 years' imprisonment shall be imposed. When merely looking at the weight of drugs of 8.69 grammes in this case, it is likely a term of 3 years or more imprisonment shall be adopted as the starting point.
6. Further, there have been other cases stating that young age shall not of itself carry much weight for deserving a lenient treatment than the tariff generally suggested (see the case of HKSAR v Manalo [2001] 1 HKLRD 557 and Secretary of Justice v Chan Ka Wah CAAR5/2007).
7. However, one must pay due regard of the defendant’s personal background. As stated in the report, he had since only age 14 when mixing up with some triad members who then passed ketamine for him to sniff. His consumption gradually increased to a stage where he even injected heroin once.
8. No doubt the need of money for consumption of drugs also motivated him to act as a courier. Generally speaking, it bears very little weight for sentencing. Nonetheless, given his very young age and of clear record, rehabilitation for him is still most important, whereupon his addiction is exactly the cause.
9. So in the circumstances I consider that he deserves a chance for rehabilitation, and I do accordingly sentence him to drug addiction treatment centre. So, defendant, you shall be sentenced to DATC.
|