On 2 March 2019, the defendant was stopped by a police officer next to a car he claimed to have borrowed from a friend. With the consent of the defendant, police officers searched the car with the following dangerous drugs found:
(1) 14.93 grammes of ‘Ice’;
(2) 9.23 grammes of fluorodeschloroketamine;
(3) 1.73 grammes of ketamine;
(4) 2.67 grammes of cocaine;
(5) 0.35 gramme of nimetazepam.
During one video interview, the defendant admitted that he was instructed to deliver the dangerous drugs in question to various places and that he did receive a reward of $1,700 the day before.
The street value of the dangerous drugs was estimated to be slightly over HK$15,000.
The defendant is 34, married, and has a clear record. Prior to his arrest, he worked on a barge.
Mitigating factors from parents and wife have been submitted to this court. Understandably, they all plea for leniency on behalf of the defendant. I understand the family’s request but I am not able to accede to for there are clear sentencing guidelines for this offence.
Guidelines on sentencing are clear. The starting point for trafficking in 14.93 grammes of ‘Ice’ alone would be set at 88 months.
Mr Wong in his submission has kindly worked out the range of sentence under various tests as proclaimed by the Court of Appeal. In summary, he has submitted that a sentence of between 90 to 99 months would be appropriate given the quantity of drugs alone. There is no objection from the prosecution.
Mr Wong has also rightly admitted that given the combination of multiple drugs seized in the present case, an aggravating factor in itself, a 3-month sentence should be added. Having considered the defendant’s personal circumstances, in particular his clear record, the overall starting point would therefore be set at 93 months’ imprisonment, that is adopting the lower figure of 90 months as urged.
The defendant indicated his plea after trial day has been fixed. He therefore is entitled to a discount of between 20 to 25 per cent. I think in light of the circumstances of the case, the appropriate discount given would be one of 22.5 per cent, a halfway between 20 and 25 per cent.
In summary, for the offence the defendant stands convicted, he is sentenced to 93 times 0.775 equals to 72 months’ imprisonment.