HKSAR v. MOK KA HONG

DCCC 1031/2023

[2024] HKDC 1985

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1031 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  Mr Mok pleaded guilty before me to the following 2 charges.

2.  Charge 1 is Possession of a dangerous drug, contrary to section 8(1)(a)  and (2)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.  Particulars are that he, on 13 June 2023, outside Room A, Flat A, 5^th Floor, Wing On Mansion, No 26 Tai Ho Road, Tsuen Wan, New Territories, in Hong Kong, had in his possession a dangerous drug, namely 4.42 grammes of a solid containing 2.72 grammes of ketamine.

3.  Charge 2 is Trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.  Particulars are that he, on 13 June 2023, at Room A, Flat A, 5^th Floor, Wing On Mansion, No 26 Tai Ho Road, Tsuen Wan, New Territories, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 52.9 grammes of a solid containing 45.9 grammes of ketamine.

Facts admitted by Mr Mok

4.  On 13 June 2023, at about 4:50 pm, police was keeping Flat A, 5/F, Wing On Mansion, Tsuen Wan, under observation.

5.  At about 6:15 pm the same day, while Mr Mok was coming out from Flat A, the police intercepted him.  Upon body search, 3 plastic packets containing 4.42 grammes of a solid containing 2.72 grammes of ketamine was found on Mr Mok together with two mobile phones and a key to a Room A subdivided within Flat A.

6.  Under caution for possession of a dangerous drug, Mr Mok stated that he possessed the 3 plastic packets of ketamine for self-consumption and asked for a chance.

7.  Using the key seized from Mr Mok, the police gained entry to Room A. Upon house search, police found the following items:-

(a)  Two plastic bags containing 52.9 grammes of a solid containing 45.9 grammes of ketamine;

(b)  An electronic scale;

(c)  Three piles of empty resealable plastic bags;

(d)  A measuring cup;

(e)  A metal spoon; and

(f)  A tenancy agreement showing Mr Mok was the tenant of Room A.

8.  At about 7:34 pm the same day, under caution for “Trafficking in a dangerous drug”, Mr Mok stated that he intended to repackage the two bags of ketamine into smaller portions and sell them for quick money.

9.  In a subsequent cautioned VRI, Mr Mok stated:-

(a)  He purchased the two bags of ketamine from an unacquainted male in a gaming bazaar in March 2023 for $10,000;

(b)  He subsequently purchased an electronic scale, a measuring cup, a metal spoon and numerous empty resealable plastic bags for repackaging and reapportioning the ketamine purchased;

(c)  The two said bags of ketamine were placed at the head end of his bed;

(d)  He intended to apportion the ketamine purchased into smaller bags (0.7 gramme per bag)  which he intended to sell for $300 each;

(e)  The three packets of ketamine found on him were packaged this way; and

(f)  He was planning to consume the three packets of ketamine on the day of arrest.

10.  The estimated retail price for all of the drug found was about $24,358.

Criminal record

11.  Mr Mok has 6 previous convictions none similar.

Antecedents statement

12.  Mr Mok is aged 32 (30 at the time of the offences), educated to F3 level.  He was a casual construction worker before arrest.  He is separated from his wife and resided in the subject premises.

Mitigation

13.  Mr Cheung Kam Chuen of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Mok.  The following is a summary of the mitigation submissions.

14.  Mr Mok has no habit of taking dangerous drug but only takes it occasionally.

15.  Mr Mok pleaded guilty to the two charges.

16.  Regarding Charge 1 of possession of 2.72 grammes of ketamine, the amount is relatively small and the latent risk is not great.  The estimated starting point for sentencing is about 12 months’ imprisonment: HKSAR v Li Yin Yu, CACC 81/2008, para 16.

17.  Regarding Charge 2 of trafficking in 45.9 grammes of ketamine, the weight falls into the sentencing guideline of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment for trafficking in 10 to 50 grammes of the drug.  The estimated sentence starting point is about 69 months’ imprisonment.

18.  Mr Mok committed the trafficking offence due to a moment of greed. 

19.  The court is asked to consider all the circumstances and the totality of the sentences before imposing a lenient sentence on Mr Mok.

20.  Mr Cheung submitted on behalf of Mr Mok a mitigation letter written in Chinese (with English translation)  by Mr Mok himself.  The contents are generally that Mr Mok dropped out of school in order to seek income to support the family finances; that he joined the construction industry and within two years, he obtained his bamboo scaffolding licence; he even established his own company specializing in scaffolding projects one year later; however, that due to the pandemic, available work was reduced to such an extent that he could only earn a few thousand dollars per month; it was during this time that he was lured by his friends to commit the offence for monetary gain; that he has now reflected upon the matter and feels regret; that he will not re-offend and will reform himself; that he wants to take care of his mother who suffers from diabetes and he wants to return to the construction industry after release from prison.

21.  Mr Cheung also submitted a mitigation letter written in Chinese by Mr Mok’s ex-employer.  The contents are generally that Mr Mok was a hardworking and helpful person and that the company would wish to re-employ him on his release from prison.  The letter writer asked for a lenient sentence for Mr Mok.

22.  Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Cheung concedes that Mr Mok was playing the role of an actual trafficker.

Sentence

23.  Trafficking in a dangerous drug is a serious offence.

24.  For Charge 1 of possession of the small amount of ketamine, I adopt a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment.  Because of the small amount and the stated intention of Mr Mok to self-consume the drug on the same day, I shall not enhance the starting point for the minimal latent risk involved.

25.  For Charge 2 of trafficking in 45.9 grammes of ketamine, I adopt an initial starting point of 69 months’ imprisonment, following the guidelines in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1.  It’s beyond doubt that Mr Mok played the role of an actual trafficker; for that, the starting point is enhanced by 3 months: see HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290 at paras 58-69.

26.  Mr Mok pleaded guilty in good time, earning for himself the customary 1/3 discount on each of the two sentences.  There is nothing in the mitigation to justify another sentence reduction.

27.  On an application of the totality principle if for nothing else, I shall make the sentences run wholly concurrently.

(Mr Mok, please stand)

28.  On Charge 1, the sentence is 8 months’ imprisonment.

29.  On Charge 2, the sentence is 48 months’ imprisonment.

30.  I order that the two sentences are to run concurrently with one another.