HKSAR v. KWOK CHUN SUM

DCCC595/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 595 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one offence of trafficking in dangerous drugs contrary to sections 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134. You admitted the brief facts, and I convicted you.

2.  Briefly what occurred is this.  At around 3.27 am on 17 April last PC2385 intercepted you and another person at the junction of Ho Tin Street and Kin Fat Street, Tuen Mun.  You were searched and this revealed a re-sealable plastic bag of suspected dangerous drugs which is E1 wrapped in tissue paper and two other bags of suspected dangerous drugs, E2. You said they were Ice to be supplied to friends. 

3.  You were arrested, and under caution, you admitted that the Ice was for self-consumption.  You also said that the friend with you did not know of your possession of the dangerous drugs.  Also in your possession was found a mobile phone and a $11 Renminbi.  Subsequent analysis revealed the E1 contained 6.4 grams of crystalline solid containing 6.17 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride.  E2, 1.73 grams of crystalline solids containing 1.68 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

4.  In a subsequent video record of interview you said the following; you were unemployed and you had used your savings to purchase the dangerous drugs; you had bought E1 and E2 on 16 April for $10,000; you had consumed around 0.3 grams of Ice per day.  E1 and E2 were for self consumption and for treating your friends for free but they would provide food in return.  If E1 and E2 were consumed by yourself they would last for about a month.  The estimated street value of all dangerous drugs in this case was $5,958.  You therefore possessed the dangerous drugs for the purpose of trafficking.  You admitted to one previous conviction for a similar type of offence, being a Part 1 poison. 

5.  Mr Szeto, on your behalf, entered mitigation. He told that you were married to a lady who resided in the Mainland and there were no children of the union.  Your wife is a housewife and you are responsible for supporting her.  I was also told that you have one brother and one sister and you are educated to Form 5.  Prior to your arrest you had been working as a casual worker in a dockyard earning about $15,000 a month when work was available.

6.  Mr Szeto, on your behalf, emphasised your plea of guilty and expressed your remorse for the commission of this offence.  He told me it was your intention to serve your sentence and keep away from this sort of behaviour.  He also told me that the purpose that you possessed the Ice was for self-consumption and also to share with friends who in turn would purchase food for you.  Logically it follows from this that there was little commercial advantage to you. 

7.  Mr Szeto submitted that a starting point of about 5½ years’ imprisonment was the correct starting point and that in addition to the discount afforded to you for your plea of guilty you should receive some additional discount because of the purpose for which you possessed the drugs. 

8.  I turn now to the sentence.  7.85 grams of Ice places it within the range of 3 to 7 years for an offence of trafficking.  In your favour I note your light record.  I also note that you were very cooperative with the police upon arrest and that you took pains to make sure that the police realised that the person with you was not involved in the offence.  I also accept what has been said on your behalf that the drugs were mainly for self consumption but there would be some sharing with friends in return for food. 

9.  Therefore, logically what follows is that this is not the usual commercial trafficking.  I therefore take what I regard as a lower starting point to reflect that fact.  The starting point I take is one of 4½ years’ imprisonment reduced to 3 years for your plea of guilty.  You will go to prison for 3 years.