COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty in Eastern Magistracy on 8 July 2024 to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. He was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Today, he confirms his plea and admission of the Summary of Facts.
The particulars of the offence are that the defendant unlawfully trafficked in 21.2 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 20.5 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, ‘Ice’, on 17 February 2022 in Room 1707, 17th Floor, Shun Lai House, Yau Lai Estate, Kowloon.
According to the Summary of Facts, the police were conducting an anti-narcotics operation near Shun Lai House at around 12.40 pm on 17 February 2022. They intercepted the defendant outside the premises. They were in possession of a search warrant for the defendant’s premises and entered it with the defendant’s keys. They found the drugs of this charge on a shelf inside the premises. He admits he unlawfully trafficked in that amount of ‘Ice’ found inside those premises on that day.
Mitigation
The defendant is now 57 years old. He was unemployed at the time of his arrest. He is not a man with a clear record. He has many previous convictions, including six for possession of dangerous drugs. The last conviction for a drug-related offence was July 2009.
I have seen a certificate today relating to a completed Bible study course whilst in remand.
Mr Lo has mitigated on behalf of the defendant and said all he can possibly say in mitigation. The defendant’s best mitigation is his plea of guilty today. I am told the drugs were not his but left there by a friend. That friend supplied the defendant with drugs for his own consumption. In return, the defendant allowed his friend to keep drugs in those premises. He did know that those drugs were for the purposes of trafficking. Essentially, he was acting as a storekeeper, is his explanation.
Sentencing
I have considered the approach to sentencing those that traffic in dangerous drugs. With the Court of Appeal’s guidance in the most recent authority, HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150, I now consider the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290.
Those six steps include assessing the gravity of the offence and applicable guideline, identifying the defendant’s role, where within the guideline the defendant should lie, any aggravating factors, any mitigating factors, and lastly, passing a sentence which is just, fair and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.
The first step is to assess the gravity of the offence and identify the applicable guideline according to the drug seized. Taking into account the latest guidelines in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234, the starting point for trafficking in methamphetamine hydrochloride, between 10 to 70 grammes, is 7 to 11 years’ imprisonment. Mathematically, trafficking in 20.5 grammes attracts a starting point of 7 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
I am satisfied that the role of the defendant in this case was that of a storekeeper. That is a position at the bottom of the hierarchy of drug traffickers. Therefore, the mathematical starting point of 7 years and 8 months should apply to this defendant.
The fourth and fifth steps require me to consider whether there are any aggravating factors or any exceptional mitigating factors. I find neither exists here.
The defendant has pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is entitled to a full one-third discount. After that discount is applied, the defendant is sentenced to 5 years and 1 month’s imprisonment.
With the last step in mind, I consider this sentence to be a fair, just and balanced one in light of the circumstances of this offence as well as the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 5 years and 1 month’s imprisonment. Do you understand?
ACCUSED: I understand.