|
DCCC 449/2020
[2021] HKDC 526
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 449 OF 2020
________________________
________________________
| Before: |
HH Judge Casewell |
| Present: |
Ms Amanda Whitfort, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR |
|
Mr Hanif Mohamed Mughal, instructed by Jal N Karbhari & Co, assigned by DLA, for the defendant |
| Offence: |
Trafficking in dangerous drugs (販運危險藥物) |
________________________
Reasons for Sentence
________________________
1. The defendant has been convicted after trial to a single offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The quantities of drugs, I am concerned with, are 8.57 grammes of cocaine and 12 tablets of methamphetamine, which involves 1.2 grammes of that narcotic, a total of 9.75 grammes of narcotic. The drugs being found on the defendant in a stop and search operation.
2. The defendant’s background is he is a 28-year-old recognisance holder born in Bangladesh, he has a clear record and apparently educated up to university level in Bangladesh. I am told he is in good health and does not appear to be a person with any drug addiction or problem. He is single with no relatives in Hong Kong according to the antecedents statement. Defendant is, as I have already said, are of clear record.
3. In terms of the calculation of sentence in this case, it is a straightforward exercise. Although there is a cocktail of drugs, the substantial quantity of drugs is that of cocaine being 8.57 grammes. The quantity of the other drug, the methamphetamine, being 1.2 grammes which would only just be out of the category where the determination of sentence would be in the discretion of the sentencer.
4. In cases such as this where there is a combination or cocktail of drugs, the court would normally approve the combined approach, which means that the calculation of the sentence will be made for the more or most serious drug in terms of potency and to take into account any significant quantities of other less serious drugs and enhance sentence insofar, as one arrives at the sentence, should be fair, realistic and one that accords common sense. One could always test the eventual sentence against three concepts, one of absurdity, conversion or what is described as the ratio test.
5. The largest quantity of drug is, of course, cocaine and the guideline sentencing for cocaine is the same as that for heroin. The determination of the guidelines is found in the case of Lau Tak Ming and Others [1990] 2 HKLR 370. For the quantity of up to 10 grammes of the narcotic, sentences range between 2 to 5 years’ imprisonment. In addition to that, there is this whole quantity of methamphetamine, 1.2 grammes. In fact, the total quantity of narcotic is 9.75 grammes. This puts it below the 10-gramme cut-off of the Lau Tak Ming guideline.
6. Based on the quantity of drug, I would impose a sentence of 4 years and 9 months’ imprisonment. The defendant is of course a Form 8 holder, that is an aggravating factor, in respect of offences of this nature which would lead to enhancement of that sentence. I will enhance the sentence by a further 3 months leading to a final sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment in this case and that will be the sentence of the court.
| |
(T Casewell) |
| |
District Judge |
|