COURT: Mr Yeung, you have pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs and the charge read as follow, that you on the 28th day on December 2020, outside Kam Tai House in Sau Mau Ping, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 164.6 grammes of a solid containing 143 grammes of cocaine.
Facts
On 28 December 2020, at around 5.30 pm, officers saw you exiting from Kam Tai House. It was observed that you were acting furtively and walked at a fast pace to the direction of another residential building upon seeing the police. You were stopped by the police. While police asked for your identity card, you suddenly ran at the direction of On Tat Tsuen. Police pursued after you and during the pursuit you threw out a packet, a transparent plastic bag contain white substance. You were caught up by the police and you admitted under caution that you owe other people money and the creditor asked you to bring a bag of dangerous drugs to On Tat Tsuen in order to settle your debts.
Later, the police retrieved the bag that you have thrown and it contained the drugs mentioned in the charge.
At the time of your arrest, the street value of the drugs, which is confirmed to be cocaine, ranged between 259,000-odd to 329,000-odd.
You are now 27. You had not previous ran into trouble. Though you were educated up to Form 3, you managed to be in gainful employment as an audio-visual engineer. However, due to the pandemic since 2019, you were unemployed.
You are the only child in the family and I can see from the letters submitted on your behalf that you still had the support from parents. In particular, you had the support from your wife who was then your girlfriend and you got married while you were in remand. While you were in remand, you also undertook some religious studies and you have shown that you have the determination to turn a new leaf.
In Herry Jane Yusuph reported in [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, the Court of Appeal had repeated the sentiment in this sort of case and:
“Personal circumstances were of far less importance than denunciation, deterrence and punishment in cases of trafficking in dangerous drugs.”
And the Court of Appeal said for these reasons, consistence was very important. The narcotics in this case is 143 grammes of cocaine. According to the guideline as laid down in the case of Lau Tak Ming, reported [1990] 2 HKLR 370, for 50 to 200 grammes of cocaine, you are looking at a range of 8 to 12 years. For 143 grammes of cocaine, I take a starting point of 10½ years. You had pleaded guilty at the earliest available opportunity and I will give you a full one-third discount for that. That comes to a figure of 7 years.
I will give you a further discount for your clear record, your genuine remorse and your determination to turn over a new leaf and more importantly, the support that you had from family members and your wife suggesting that you are a person of good nature and I accept this is a single fall from grace. I will give you an additional discount of 6 months. I sentence you to a term of imprisonment for 6½ years.