COURT: The defendant, Tang Yiu-sing, was charged with two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134. He pleaded guilty before a magistrate and was committed to the Court of First Instance of the High Court for sentence.
Admitted Facts
On 12 April 2021, while the police was on patrol around a car park at Ma Tin Road, Yuen Long, they spotted the defendant approach the back of a vehicle with registration plate number WM2867. Defendant boarded the vehicle and sat on the driver seat. After a while, he left the driver seat with a black bag and went to the lift lobby of the car park.
The police intercepted the defendant and found inside the bag a pink plastic bag which had inside a plastic bag containing 23.9 grammes of a solid containing 21.1 grammes of cocaine. The defendant was arrested. Under caution, the defendant admitted that he sold cocaine because he was short of income.
The defendant then led the police to the vehicle and further told them that more drug could be found from the vehicle. The police searched the middle glove compartment of the vehicle and found the following: A brown paper bag which had inside nine blue plastic bags containing a total of 143 grammes of a solid containing 125 grammes of cocaine and a packet of drying agent and also a bundle of pink plastic bags inside the same compartment.
Inside the storage compartment near the front passenger seat of the vehicle, the police found an electronic scale and a bundle of resealable plastic bags. The defendant was arrested and cautioned again. Under caution the defendant admitted that all the ‘Coke’ belonged to him.
The street value of all the cocaine seized, which is a total of 166.9 grammes of a solid containing 146.1 grammes of cocaine was HK$269,377.
The defendant admitted he possessed the cocaine seized in the present case for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.
Background and Mitigation
According to the antecedents statement, the defendant was born in 1989 and is now 33 years of age. He has four previous convictions, two of claiming to be a member of a triad society and two of inciting or inducing another to be a member of triad society. He claimed to have studied up to Form 3 and worked as a junior hair stylist.
Mr Chui, counsel for the defendant, confirmed the information supplied in the antecedent statement, adding that the defendant earned around $16,000 per month as a junior stylist at the time of the offence. Mr Chui submitted that the defendant played the role of a courier in this case.
I was provided with what is called a mitigation bundle. It contained letters written by the defendant, his parents, his god-sister, sworn-sister and from the defendant’s supervisor at the hair salon he was working. I do not think it necessary to repeat the contents of all the letters. Suffice it to say that the defendant expressed his remorse and begged for a chance to be dealt with leniently, promising that he would be a law-abiding person. His parents and others all sang praises on the defendant, saying that he was a good person who took care of the family, kind-hearted and willing to help others and that he was diligent and willing to learn when working. All these people asked for leniency on behalf of the defendant.
I was provided with letters of appreciation from Plan International, thanking the defendant for sponsoring children under the scheme in Timor-Leste, Myanmar and Indonesia. I was also provided with photographs of these children that the defendant sponsored.
I am prepared to treat the defendant as a person of good character, that means with no previous conviction, for the purpose of sentencing on account of his good deed in sponsoring these children, even though he had four previous triad-related conviction records. And of course, I do bear in mind that those offences were committed when the defendant was under 21 years of age.
Consideration and Reasons for the Sentence
For the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, a person convicted upon indictment is liable to life imprisonment and a fine of $5 million. Although the defendant was found guilty of two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug upon his plea, the circumstances of these two offences were such that the cocaine found in the 1st count was clearly connected with those found in the 2nd count. So I will consider the appropriate overall starting point by adding the quantity of both counts together, the authority is HKSAR v Cheung Kwok Leung.
In the case of Attorney General v Pedro Nel Rojas, it was held that the sentencing guideline laid down in the case of Lau Tak Ming should apply for the trafficking of cocaine. The cocaine involved here is 146.1 grammes which falls in the category of 50 to 200 grammes, with a starting point of between 8 to 12 years. On a mathematical calculation, the quantity of 146.1 grammes would attract a starting point of around 10 years and 4 months’ imprisonment. Having considered all the circumstances of this case, I am of the view that a starting point of 10 years is appropriate.
The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest available opportunity and is entitled to a full one-third discount. There are no other grounds to further reduce the sentence. So the resulting sentence is one of 6 years and 8 months. So the sentence for the 1st count is 6 years 8 months, 2nd count, also 6 years 8 months. Both sentences to run concurrently, making a total of 6 years and 8 months.