HKSAR v. WAN TIN CHAU

HCCC 152/2025

[2026] HKCFI 1316

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 152 OF 2025

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: The defendant had pleaded guilty to a count of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The charge charged him on the 26th day of March 2024 inside a private car with registration number UX7396 parked outside No. 9 Fort Street, North Point, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in dangerous drugs, namely, 123.6 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 122.5 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, 50.6 grammes of a solid containing 42.2 grammes of ketamine, and 9.49 grammes of a solid containing 6.38 grammes of cocaine.

The facts which the defendant admitted are as follows.

In the afternoon of 26 March 2024, police officers mounted an anti-narcotics operation in the vicinity of Fort Street, North Point. At around 2.45 pm, Police Constable 21631 spotted the defendant driving a silver private car, with registration number UX7396, furtively.

Defendant then parked the car outside No. 9 Fort Street, North Point. Feeling suspicious, police constable intercepted defendant for inquiry. Upon search of the car,

the following dangerous drugs were found inside the armrest storage compartment between the driver’s seat and the front passenger’s seat:

(a) 36 resealable plastic bags containing a total of 9.49 grammes of a solid containing 6.38 grammes of cocaine;

(b) four resealable plastic bags containing a total of 18.6 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 18.5 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride;

(c) 13 resealable plastic bags containing a total of 105 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 104 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride;

(d) 29 resealable plastic bags containing a total of 50.6 grammes of a solid containing 42.2 grammes of ketamine.

Defendant also had with him three mobile phones and cash, 19,310. Police arrested the defendant. Under caution, defendant remained silent. In subsequent video-recorded interviews, defendant also remained silent.

The total drugs seized in the present case were confirmed by the government chemist to be (i) 123.6 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 122.5 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride; (ii) 50.6 grammes of a solid containing 42.2 grammes of ketamine; and (iii) 9.49 grammes of a solid containing 6.38 grammes of cocaine.

The total estimated street value of the drugs is $96,428 if cocaine in powder form or $100,071 with cocaine in crack form.

Defendant now accepts and admits that at all material times he knowingly possessed all subject dangerous drugs seized for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Background of Defendant

He is now 36 and he was 35 at the time of the offence. He had on four occasions been convicted of offences though not related to drugs. He was given a 6 month sentence, suspended for 3 years on 27 November 2023, and within four months, he committed the present offence.

He was educated up to Form 3 and was unemployed at the time of the offence.

Given that he was found in possession of three types of drugs on the same occasion and I consider that a combined approach in sentencing is appropriate. The most potent drug in this case is methamphetamine hydrochloride and also is of substantial quantity. So I will use it as the base for sentencing purpose.

Trafficking in 122.5 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride attracts a term of imprisonment of 12 years according to the new guidelines laid out by the Court of Appeal in Huang Ruifang. An upward adjustment is called for in view of the smaller quantities of cocaine and the less potent drug, ketamine, seized.

I have checked the upward adjustment that I have in mind against the three tests enunciated in Chan Yuk Leong. The range of sentence is between 12 years and 9 months to 12 years 2 months. The Court of Appeal has moved from pure mathematic calculation to considering the role of the defendant in drug trafficking cases, and the Court of Appeal also suggested depends on the role, the starting point may go above the range calculated according to arithmetic.

I have indicated to Mr Cheung, who appeared for the defendant, that I am not prepared to accept his role as a mere courier, ie the lowest end of culpability in view of the number of packaging that was found on him and he was in public driving a vehicle.

The drugs are in readily distributable form. I have no difficulty in concluding in the absence of any evidence that he is a direct trafficker supplying these packets of drugs to consumers. In the circumstances, I adopt a starting point of 12 years and 6 months.

As rightly said by Mr Cheung, his background, really, is not that one could reduce the starting point in any meaningful way. Except the early plea, I see no mitigation in this case.

In view of the fact that I have mentioned, you committed the present offence about four months after the suspended term of imprisonment was imposed on you and you have previous convictions although not related to drugs, I do not think you are a person that would deserve any mercy from the court. I will give you a full one-third discount from the starting point for your early plea.

Therefore, the sentence I pass on you is one of 8 years and 4 months.