HKSAR v. CHEUNG WING YIN

DCCC 646/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 646 OF 2014

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to the charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 82.4 grammes of ketamine. He was convicted accordingly.

2.  The brief facts of the case are straightforward. 

3.  At about 6:28 pm on 15 May 2014, two police officers spotted the defendant acting furtively at the junction of Canal Road and Lockhart Road, Wanchai.  The police stopped and searched the defendant. 

4.  Upon body search, the officer found 8 transparent resealable plastic bags, containing dangerous drugs, inside the bag carried by the defendant.  The defendant nodded his head when the officer mentioned that the drugs were ketamine.

5.  Under caution, the defendant confessed that he helped someone to deliver the ketamine to Ah Cheong for a reward of $1,000.

6.  At the time of arrest, the defendant had HK$18,170 odd, renminbi $100 and one mobile phone.

7.  Chemical analysis confirms that the drug so seized was 101.28 grammes of a powder containing 82.4 grammes of ketamine.

8.  The estimated street value of the drug was $12,356.

Mitigation

9.  The defendant is now aged 18 and single.  His mother is in court today to show her support.

10.  The defendant had one previous conviction of criminal intimidation for which he was sentenced to 4 weeks’ imprisonment on 4 August this year.  It was accepted that the defendant committed the present drug offence while he was on police bail.

11.  It was submitted that the defendant should be treated as one of clear record as far as the drugs offence is concerned. 

12.  Defence counsel also took the opportunity to tender two reports, namely the probation report and the DC/RC/TC suitability report, which were called for by the Magistrate in August.

13.  The report said the defendant is a drug dependent.  It was also reported that the death of the defendant’s father in 2001 has a great impact on the defendant in his growth and study. 

14.  Defence counsel also tendered the mitigation letters drafted by the defendant’s mother and the service supervisor of the Salvation Army respectively.

15.  In the mitigation letter, the defendant’s mother maintained that the defendant’s nature is not bad and the defendant contributed 30 per cent of his income to the family.  The defendant further promised his mother that he will be a good person after serving the sentence and will show his determination to correct his behaviour. 

16.  The service supervisor also confirmed that the defendant had shown much regret in committing the current offence and promised not to re-offend again.  The defendant has already been punished by his own conscience. 

17.  Both pleaded for leniency from the court.

Sentence

18.  I accept that as far as the drugs offence is concerned, the defendant can be taken to be of clear record.

19.  The two reports of the defendant submitted by the defence counsel revealed more background information about the defendant. In April 2011 the defendant joined a triad society.  In March 2013 the defendant started peddling ketamine in order to earn easy money.  In April 2013 the defendant started to consume cocaine.  In January 2014 the defendant even consumed “Ice” with his peers.

20.  That said, this court will sentence the defendant on the basis of the brief facts admitted by the defendant.

21.  The only substantial mitigating factor is the guilty plea entered by the defendant.  I have to say this is a very wise move, otherwise the defendant will certainly face a lengthy imprisonment term if he was convicted after trial.  By pleading to the charge, the defendant is entitled to have one-third discount in sentence.  In fact, the prosecution case against the defendant is strong.

22.  The drug was contained in 14 bags with a street value of about $12,356.  The defendant now aged 18 and received education up to Form 3, allegedly worked in an auto-beauty shop with a monthly income of $11,000.  And yet when the defendant was arrested, he had HK$18,170 odd and renminbi $100 in cash with him. 

23.  It is fortunate that the defendant has a caring mother who has no hesitation to show her affection and support towards the defendant, her younger son.  But it is sad to see that the defendant was a drug addict, taking various kinds of dangerous drugs for a few years.  Now the defendant was being made use of by the drug syndicate to engage in drug trafficking activity for a meagre sum of $1,000 as a reward.  The defendant now has to pay the price by wasting his youth in jail and breaking his mother’s heart. 

24.  It is quite often that young offenders are willing to be exploited by drug syndicates with a wrong impression that young offenders may get a lenient sentence.  That is wrong.  Although the defendant is under 21 years of age, it is an excepted offence under section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance and the court can sentence the defendant to jail, without calling for any report.

25.  In 2008 the Court of Appeal has laid down a harsh sentencing guideline in relation to offences of trafficking in ketamine.  In normal circumstances, trafficking in ketamine of 50 grammes to 300 grammes will attract a starting point of 6 years to 9 years.  The present offence involves 82.4 grammes of ketamine and it will attract a term of 6½ years as a starting point.

26.  I will give the full one-third discount to the defendant and reduce the sentence to 52 months.

27.  I am sure that, with the help of his mother and family, the defendant will turn a new leaf and will not be a drug dependent again.  I also accept that the defendant will keep his promise not to commit any criminal wrongs again and will rebuild his life when working in his uncle’s company after his discharge from prison.

28.  As said, I exercise my discretion and further reduce 4 months in sentence.  That is to say, I sentence the defendant to 48 months’ imprisonment.