HKSAR v. KWONG KING LAM

DCCC375/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 375 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

The Charge and the Facts

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

2.  The facts are not unfamiliar. In the afternoon of 23 February 2011, while the police were conducting an operation in Yau Ma Tei, they found the Defendant acting suspiciously near Yung Shue Tau Garden. At the time, several males approached the Defendant, the Defendant put his hand over his mouth, and he then passed something in his fist to them.

3.  Later, the Defendant left the park and travelled to Lai Chi Kok Road. The police kept following him. The Defendant entered a building. When the Defendant returned to the ground floor, he saw the police and tried to run away. However, the Defendant was later subdued and 60 packets of the drug in question, that is, 10.14 grammes of a mixture containing 6.52 grammes of heroin hydrochloride, was found inside the Defendant’s left front trousers pocket.

4.  Under caution at the scene and when interviewed in the police station, the Defendant admitted that he was trafficking in the heroin, and that he would earn HK$10 by selling each packet of the drug.

5.  The estimated street value of the drug was HK$7,930.

Mitigation

6.  The Defendant is aged 44. He was educated up to Form 2 level in the Mainland. Prior to his arrest, the Defendant had worked as a casual labourer, earning about HK$250 per day. On average, he only worked 7-8 days per month. The Defendant was in receipt of comprehensive social security of HK$1,800 per month. He is single and he lived alone. However, he has a mother aged 65. It was said that his mother is of poor health and the Defendant would therefore need to look after her.

7.  The Defendant has been before the court on 10 previous occasions with 12 conviction records. Most of those were theft-related but he was thrice convicted of “possession of a dangerous drug”, and on each of those occasions, he was sent to the DATC.

8.  In mitigation, it was said that the Defendant committed the offence as he did not have sufficient money to support his living. It was also said that this was the Defendant’s first “trafficking” offence and that he was fully co-operative with the police after being arrested.

9.  A letter written by the Defendant was also given to the court. In gist, the Defendant expressed his remorse and asked for a lenient sentence. The Defendant reiterated that he is the only one who could look after his mother.

The Sentence Imposed

10.  In R v Lau Tak Ming & Others [1990] 2 HKLR 370, the Court of Appeal laid down the tariffs for trafficking in heroin. For trafficking up to 10 grammes of narcotic, a term of imprisonment of 2 to 5 years is called for. In the present case, the narcotic involved was 6.52 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. For this quantity and after taking into account the facts of this case, I consider a starting point of 45 months to be appropriate.

11.  The Defendant pleaded guilty and he will get a 1/3 reduction in sentence for his plea.

12.  I have carefully considered the matters put forth in mitigation and, other than his plea, I do not see any strong mitigating factor which would warrant any additional reduction in sentence.

13.  45 months reduced by one-third is 30 months. The Defendant is therefore to serve a term of 30 months’ imprisonment for this charge.