HKSAR v. HUI KWAN

DCCC464/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 464 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drug Ordinance.

2.  You have admitted that on 1 March 2010, at the 1st Floor of No.141, Tai San Back Street, Cheung Chau, you unlawfully trafficked in 98.84 grams of a powder containing 80.85 grams of ketamine, and 134 tablets containing 0.99 grams of nimetazepam.

3.  Acting on information, police officers of the Cheung Chau Division mounted an anti-dangerous drugs operation against you on 1 March 2010.  They were in possession of a search warrant to search your house.

4.  At about 7.20 pm that day, you were seen leaving your premises.  You were then intercepted by the police officers and were taken back to your house.

5.  The police officers conducted a house search there and found the dangerous drugs concerned.  There were 30 plastic bags of drugs containing the ketamine.  Four of the plastic bags were larger bags containing larger amounts of ketamine and 24 plastic bags contained a smaller amount of ketamine.  The tablets were sealed in foil packets.  Police also found an electronic scale and a plastic straw. 

6.  You were arrested and under caution you said that the drugs were for your own consumption and had nothing to do with your family.

7.  You were taken back to the police station at Cheung Chau, and on the next morning very early between half past midnight and 1.09 am in a video-recorded interview you admitted that you had bought the drugs from an unknown male in a pub in Jordan for $8,500 for your own consumption, and the electronic scale found in the premises belonged to your ex-wife.

8.  Upon examination, the Government Chemist found that the plastic straw in the premises contained traces of a powder containing ketamine.

9.  Mr Ma, your solicitor, has mitigated on your behalf today and I have taken into consideration all that he has had to say.

10.  You are 35 years of age and divorced with a young daughter.  You have been in court on six previous occasions, and have on those occasions five separate convictions of possession of dangerous drugs, a further two of possession of Part I poison.

11.  Mr Ma has said that you have all along worked in Cheung Chau as a labourer in a bakery earning $3,500 a month. 

12.  Although as can be reflected in your record you are a drug addict, Mr Ma asked the court to note you have no previous convictions for trafficking in dangerous drugs. 

13.  The reason why you had trafficked in dangerous drugs, Mr Ma tells me, is because you wanted to repay a debt which you had incurred as a result of your mother’s funeral expenses.

14.  Your mother sadly passed away earlier this year in January 2010.  You had incurred $20,000 of expenses and wanted to repay your debtors quickly and got involved in this wrongful means of repayment.

15.  You are, of course, remorseful for your crime. You have pleaded guilty and asked the court for leniency.

16.  Mr Ma has informed me that he has informed you of the case of Hii Siew Cheng, and the likely outcome involved in this quantity of drugs and that it will be a lengthy gaol term.

17.  Quite correctly, guidelines have been set down by the Court of Appeal in that case, and the quantity of drugs of ketamine you had was 80.85 grammes and that falls within the bracket of 50 to 300 grammes, which is a starting point of imprisonment of 6 to 9 years.

18.  In following the guidelines in that case I take a starting point of 6 years’ imprisonment , and I give you full credit for your plea of guilty and reduce that term to 4 years’ imprisonment.

19.  The nimetazepam is a very nominal quantity of drugs, and I shall not be taking that into account in sentence. So your total term of imprisonment would be that of 4 years.