HKSAR v. LAU HO LONG

DCCC 128/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 128 OF 2014

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

-----------------------------------------
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
-----------------------------------------

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to s 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.

Facts

2.  Around 8:22 pm on 11 December 2013, outside ground floor of Shek Lei Market in Kwai Chung, the defendant was stopped and searched by the police.  A transparent resealable plastic bag containing 185.15 grammes of a powder containing 134.95 grammes of ketamine was found in the right pocket of the jacket that the defendant was wearing.  Under caution, the defendant admitted that the ketamine belonged to him.

3.  In pleading guilty to the charge, the defendant admitted the Summary of Facts which alleges, among other things, that “at all material times, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in the dangerous drug as particularized in the charge sheet”.

4.  The estimated market value of the ketamine involved in this cases was HKD22,588.

Defendant’s background

5.  The defendant is 23 years old, single, and was living with his mother, grandmother and aunt in Shek Lei Estate.  He was educated to secondary two level.  Of his 11 previous convictions, only his last conviction is drug-related, and he was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment for possession of a dangerous drug on the last occasion.

Mitigation

6.  In mitigation, the defendant’s counsel Mr Ho told the court that the defendant had pleaded guilty knowing the serious consequences he would be facing; and that such a plea indicted his remorse.  The defendant was a drug addict who had committed the present offence for quick money.  Mr Ho pointed out that 10% of the ketamine found on the defendant was for his own consumption, and that this assertion was accepted by the Prosecution.  He urged the court to adopt a lower starting point, having drawn the court’s attention to the Court of Appeal’s decisions in HKSAR v Chow Chung Sang CACC 125/2011, and HKSAR v Tsang Chung Keung CACC 165/2014.  Mr Ho also told the court that the defendant’s last conviction for possession of a dangerous drug was for possession of ketamine.

7.  I have also considered the contents of the letter written by the defendant for the purpose of mitigation.

Reasons for Sentence

8.  Having heard the address in mitigation made on behalf of the defendant, this court is of the view that there are only 2 mitigating factors of substance: one is the defendant’s plea of guilty, the other one is the defendant’s claim, which is accepted by the prosecution, that 10% of the ketamine found on him was for his own consumption.  Accordingly, discounts in sentence will be given for these two factors.

9.  According to the sentencing guidelines set out in Hiu Siew Cheung [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, the sentencing range for trafficking in 50-300 grammes of ketamine is 6-9 years.  For the amount of 134.95 grammes of ketamine involved in this case, a starting point of 6 years and 10 months imprisonment would be appropriate.

10.  The defendant’s last conviction seems to support the assertion that he was a drug addict and that he had some of the ketamine for his own use.  The claim that 10% of the ketamine found was for his own consumption is accepted by the Prosecution.  For the purpose of sentencing, this court would accept that that was indeed the portion of ketamine the defendant had for his own consumption.  Having regard to what was said by the Court of Appeal in the cases of Chow Chun Sang and Tsang Chung Keung, and to the circumstances of our case, this court would reduce the starting point by 10% to give effect to the factor of self-consumption. The resulting sentence is 73.8 months.  This sentence will be further reduced by 1/3 to take account of the defendant guilty plea, resulting in a sentence of 49.2 months, which will be rounded down to 49 months.

11.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to imprisonment for 49 months.