HKSAR v. CHONG HUNG KONG

HCCC291/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 291 OF 2009

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:  This defendant pleaded guilty today to three charges, one of assaulting a police officer in the due execution of his duty, the second, trafficking in a dangerous drug, the narcotic quantity being 6.94 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as “Ice”, and the 3rd charge, also for trafficking with narcotic quantity of 49.52 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, also known as “Ice”.

     On 8 March 2009 at about 1.20 in the morning, patrolling uniformed officers saw the defendant approaching them.  The defendant turned away and left hurriedly, placing his hand over his left front trouser pocket as he did so.  He was intercepted by the officers who asked to search him.  The defendant said, “If you want to search me, do it at the police station.”  At that stage, he hit the male officer on the left angle of his jaw, causing it to bleed.  He fled for a short distance but was intercepted after about 10 metres.

     He took a plastic bag containing a crystalline substance from his pocket and threw it to the ground.  He struggled and was eventually subdued.  He was taken to a rear lane and searched where four transparent plastic bags were found in his left trouser pocket.  He was also found to be carrying two mobile phones and $6,900-odd in cash.

     Later in a cautioned interview he told the police that he had bought the dangerous drug at a playground about a week before his arrest.  He said it was for his own consumption and that he had paid about $6,000 for the drug.  He admitted that he had committed the assault in order to escape because he knew he was carrying the ice. 

     The constable attended the Kwong Wah Hospital.  The doctors found a small abrasion at the left angle of his mouth.  They noted some surrounding bruising and swelling and the officer complained of tenderness.  The officer was discharged the same day and given two days’ sick leave.

     The total retail value of the drugs as at March 2009 was estimated to be $37,928 which makes it highly unlikely that this was for his own consumption.  Today, before the court, the defendant admitted that he had the ice for trafficking. 

     He has a lengthy criminal record.  He has eight previous for possession of dangerous drugs or minor drug offences.  In 2002 he was sentenced to 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment on each of two robbery counts to which he pleaded in the High Court.  The other offences appear to be copyright offences in the main.  I note apart from a criminal damage convicted in 1994 and the robbery counts there do not appear to be any offences of violence on the record. 

     In mitigation I was advised that the defendant is aged 29.  He is single; the only child of his parents; he was unemployed at the time of his arrest and he appears to have spent a large amount of his sentence time in DATC.

     As Mr Luk, his counsel, points out the only mitigation in this case is his pleas of guilty for which he is entitled to the full one-third discount.  I have considered the tariff sentences set out in Ching Kwok Hung.  The total narcotic quantity of drugs in this case comes into the 10 to 70 gramme range which means a sentence of seven to 10 years.  I have also been referred to the case of HKSAR v Hung Mei Kwan in relation to the assault on a police officer.  I have, myself, looked at the case of Ku Kit Ling where Mr Justice Nguyen in September of 2004, looked at various cases of this nature, assault of a police officer. 

     An assault of a police officer is always a serious matter even though the reason for this has been explained as being because the defendant knew he had the drugs on him.  I accept that the injuries were not serious but the police officer was on sick leave for two days so there is not only time wasted at the hospital by staff having to examine these injuries but there is also the force losing an officer for two days to sick leave.

     In respect of the 1st charge, I take a starting point of 6 months’ imprisonment and sentence him to 4 months. 

     In respect of the 2nd charge, I take a starting point of 6 years and sentence him to 4 years’ imprisonment.

     In respect of Charge 3, I take into account the total quantity of the drugs and take a starting point of 9 years and sentence him to 6 years’ imprisonment. 

     I order that the sentences on Charges 2 and 3 run concurrently.  However, the sentence on Charge 1 will be consecutive to the other two sentences.   The total sentence therefore is 6 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.