HKSAR v. YEUNG HOI CHING, VENESSA

HCCC 129/2025

[2026] HKCFI 839

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 129 OF 2025

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of “trafficking in a dangerous drug”, and admitted the Summary of Facts in the committal proceedings at the Eastern Magistracy on 10 April 2025. The case was then committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Before this court, the defendant confirmed her pleas and her agreement to the Summary of Facts through counsel.

2.  The particulars of the charges state as follow.  Regarding Charge 1, on 13th day of April 2024, at the lift lobby, 30th floor, Block D, Tak Bo Garden, No. 3 Ngau Tau Kok Road, Kowloon Bay, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 27.8 grammes of a solid containing 23.3 grammes of ketamine. 

3.  Regarding Charge 2, on the 13th day of April 2024 at Flat D4, 30th Floor, Block D, Tak Bo Garden, No. 3 Ngau Tau Kok Road, Kowloon Bay, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 469.33 grammes of a solid containing 392.28 grammes of ketamine. 

4.  The Summary of Facts admitted by the defendant provides, inter alia, as follows. On 13 April 2024, the police conducted an anti-narcotic operation in the vicinity of Tak Bo Garden, No. 3 Ngau Tau Kok Road, Kowloon Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, and laid ambush at the rear staircases of the 30th Floor, Block D, Tak Bo Garden. 

5.  At around 8.02 pm, police officers saw the defendant leaving Flat D4 and walked towards the lift lobby on the 30th Floor.  Police officers then intercepted the defendant for enquiry and search.  At the material time, the defendant was carrying a handbag.  Upon search, one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 40 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 27.8 grammes of a solid containing 23.3 grammes of ketamine were found in the handbag. 

6.  The defendant was then arrested and cautioned for trafficking in a dangerous drug.

7.  At the time of arrest, the defendant had cash of HK$110, one mobile phone with two SIM cards, a bunch of five keys, and an access card to Tak Bo Garden on her person. 

8.  Thereafter, the defendant was brought back to her home at Flat D4 (“the Premises”) for investigation.  With the keys found on the defendant, the police gained entry to the Premises and conducted a search on the strength of a search warrant. 

9.  Upon search, the following items were found in the living room of the Premises:

(1) On the sofa:

(i) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 90 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 85.2 grammes of a solid containing 71.2 grammes of ketamine;

(ii) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 100 smaller transparent resealable plastic bag containing a total of 95 grammes of a solid containing 80.3 grammes of ketamine;

(iii) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 101 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 93.4 grammes of a solid containing 77.9 grammes of ketamine;

(iv) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 81 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 74.7 grammes of a solid containing 62.3 grammes of ketamine;

(v) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 40 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 27.7 grammes of a solid containing 23.2 grammes of ketamine;

(vi) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 100 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags containing a total of 91.9 grammes of a solid containing 76.2 grammes of ketamine; and

(vii) one transparent resealable plastic bag containing 1.43 grammes of a solid containing 1.18 grammes of ketamine.

(2) On the coffee table:

(i) one plastic container containing 39 pieces of unused transparent resealable plastic bags;

(ii) two pairs of scissors;

(iii) two electronic scales;

(iv) one silver spoon; and

(v) one transparent plastic cup containing 0.05 grammes of a solid containing ketamine.

10.  In addition, one plastic container containing a large number of unused transparent resealable plastic bags of different sizes were found on the floor near the coffee table.  Two mobile phones and one “Notice of New Letting or Renewal Agreement” in respect of the Premises with the defendant being named as the tenant were also found on the TV cabinet. 

11.  In other words, a total of 469.33 grammes of a solid containing 392.28 grammes of ketamine was found and seized from the Premises. 

12.  The defendant was further cautioned for “Trafficking in a dangerous drug”.  Under caution, the defendant stated that she owed others money and hence she assisted in repacking the drug and delivering to others as a repayment of her debts. 

13.  The landlord of the Premises confirmed that the defendant was the tenant of the Premises commencing from 10 October 2023 at the monthly rent of HK$11,800.  However, the defendant defaulted in paying rent since December 2023. 

14.  The estimated street value of all the dangerous drugs seized was around HK$227,189. 

15.  The defendant admits and accepts that at the material time she unlawfully trafficked in all the dangerous drugs seized. 

16.  The personal background of the defendant is as follows.  The defendant is 27 years of age.  She has only one previous conviction for possession of dangerous drug and no drug trafficking record.  She is single.  She attained education up to Secondary Form 5.  She worked as a beautician before her arrest.  Her parents got divorced when she was 15 years old and she had been lured to take ‘Ice’ by bad peers when she was a teenager and she became addicted to it. 

17.  The former boyfriend of the defendant had a gambling debt of around HK$100,000 and she was foolish enough to be persuaded to clear his debt by trafficking drugs, I am told.  Defendant further submits that she has learned a bitter lesson. She is now very remorseful and she is determined to rehabilitate. 

18.  The sentencing approach for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug is laid down in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, which is further clarified in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.  The first step is to identify the relevant sentencing band or bracket applicable to the quantity of drug concerned.  The second step is an assessment of the role and culpability of the defendant based on evidence before the court.  The third step is to identify where in the relevant band of the guidelines the defendant comes.  It may be necessary to go outside the band to reflect the particular circumstances of the offence and the role of the defendant.  The fourth step is to consider aggravating factors which bear on the “notional sentence after trial”.  The fifth step is to have regard to any matters of mitigation, bearing in mind that “personal circumstances will count for little, unless they are exceptional”.  The sixth and final step is for the judge to stand back and look at the overall sentence passed in order to ensure that it is a “fair, just, and balanced sentence”. 

19.  Regarding the first step, the task is to identify the appropriate range applicable to the total quantity of drugs involved.  As the dangerous drugs the subject matter of the two charges were found on the same occasion, I consider it appropriate to treat all the dangerous drug seized as one lot of drug and to ascertain an appropriate global starting point for the same. 

20.  The total quantity of drug seized in respect of Charge 1 and Charge 2 is 415.58 grammes of ketamine.  For 300 to 600 grammes of ketamine, the applicable guideline tariff band is that of 9 to 12 years’ imprisonment: see Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1 at paragraph 95. 

21.  Second, concerning the defendant’s role and culpability, I accept that the defendant was a courier or storekeeper of the drug. 

22.  Third, for a total quantity of 415.58 grammes of ketamine, an arithmetical approach towards the guidelines would lead to a “notional sentence after trial” of 10 years and 1.9 months’ imprisonment.  In view of my aforesaid finding of the defendant’s role and culpability, I consider that 10 years and 1.9 months would be the appropriate global notional sentence after trial for the offences in question.

23.  Fourth, I consider that there is no aggravating factor which would enhance the global notional sentence after trial. 

24.  Fifth, I consider that the only mitigating factor which may reduce the defendant’s sentence is her timely guilty plea, for which I will give her a one-third discount.  Accordingly, the global sentence to be imposed on the defendant is 6 years and 9 months’ imprisonment. 

25.  To achieve that global sentence, I would sentence the defendant as follows:

(1) 3 years and 1 month’s imprisonment on Charge 1;

(2) 6 years and 7 months’ imprisonment on Charge 2;

(3) I order that 2 months of the sentence on Charge 1 is to run consecutively to the sentence on Charge 2, resulting in the total sentence of 6 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.

26.  Finally, I consider that a sentence of 6 years and 9 months’ imprisonment is a fair, just and balanced sentence in view of all the circumstances of the case and the circumstances of the defendant.