COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance.
On the material day, the defendant was intercepted by police officers outside one premises in a building in Mong Kok. Police officers found on him a total of 25.98 grammes of “Ice” and 3.3 grammes of ketamine and other paraphernalia such as resealable bags and electronic scale.
Under caution, the defendant admitted initially that the “Ice” was for sale and that the people inside the premises had nothing to do with it. That is essentially the prosecution’s case.
At the request of the defendant’s counsel, Mr Raffell, I adjourned the sentence on the last occasion in order to obtain a psychiatrist’s report. This morning I am also furnished with a report from a social worker. In short, these two reports reveal the defendant’s troubled past. He, however, is not suffering from any active psychiatric diseases or illnesses.
Mr Raffell also submits to this court that a small portion of the “Ice” seized on that day is for the defendant’s own use. I accept that, but as pointed out by the Court of Appeal, possession of dangerous drugs itself is also a criminal offence. A small portion of that makes very little difference to the overall sentence.
Guidelines on sentencing are clear. The appropriate starting point for trafficking in, say, 26 grammes of “Ice” is one of 93 months’ imprisonment. Given the fact that some would be used for the defendant’s own consumption, I therefore lower the starting point to one of 90 months’ imprisonment.
Insofar as the other drug is concerned, it is too small, and can be ignored for the purpose of this sentencing exercise.
The defendant of course will be given the usual discount for his plea.
In conclusion, for the sole count of trafficking in dangerous drugs which the defendant has pleaded, he is therefore sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment.