HKSAR v. CHEUNG SUI SUM

HCCC 371/2024

[2025] HKCFI 2368

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 371 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The Charge

1.  On 4 November 2024, the defendant pleaded guilty in the magistracy to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.  The count involved 25.07 kilogrammes of a solid containing 21.211 kilogrammes of cocaine.  On the same day, the defendant admitted a Summary of Facts dated 4 October 2024 and he was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentencing.  Today, before this Court, the defendant confirmed his guilty plea to the trafficking count and his admission of the Summary of Facts.

Facts Admitted

2.  The facts of the case can be summarized as follows. 

3.  On 9 February 2023, plainclothes police officers mounted an operation at Hang Wai Industrial Centre in Tuen Mun. The defendant was later seen carrying a sling bag and leaving Unit 192B of the Centre.  He was later subdued by police officers at the scene after a fierce struggle.

4.  With one of the keys found from the defendant, police officers gained entry into Unit 192B.  Inside Unit 192B, the defendant was searched and the police found from his sling bag a packet containing 250 grammes of a solid containing 215 grammes of cocaine.

5.  Upon arrest and verbal caution, the defendant admitted “I only receive a few hundred dollars to deliver the drugs ‘Hei Sui’ to others.”

6.  On the strength of a warrant, the police searched Unit 192B and they found a total of 99 packets containing cocaine in a carton box on the floor.  They also found a cutting machine, a pile of black plastic bags, two electronic scales, a hammer and a cutter.

7.  In summary, a total of 25.07 kilogrammes of a solid containing 21.211 kilogrammes of cocaine was found and seized from the defendant’s sling bag and inside Unit 192B. 

8.  Upon investigation, the defendant was found to be the tenant of Unit 192B, with a tenancy entered into for the period from 1 August 2022 to 31 July 2024 at a monthly rental of HK$4,000.

9.  In two subsequent video-recorded interviews, the defendant admitted under caution that:

(1)  in around April or May 2022, he came to know a person (“the Man”)  in a bar who asked him if he was interested in delivering dangerous drugs for a reward. He agreed as he was in debt. Unit 192B was rented in his own name upon instructions of the Man;

(2)  about 4-5 days before his arrest, he received instructions from the Man about delivery to Unit 192B of some dangerous drugs that were concealed in some wooden planks;

(3)  after he received the wooden planks, he broke them open to take out the drugs and put them into the carton box on the floor in Unit 192B;

(4)  on the day of his arrest, he received instructions to collect one block of dangerous drugs from Unit 192B for a delivery, which he did but he was intercepted by the police upon leaving Unit 192B; and

(5)  he had not received any monetary rewards yet so far.

10.  In February 2023, the estimated street values of the cocaine seized were about HK$19,780,230 (in powder form)  and HK$25,771,960 (in crack form).

11.  In the Summary of Facts, the defendant also admitted that he possessed all the cocaine for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Background and mitigation

12.  The defendant is now aged 37 years old.  He is married with a son and a daughter (both aged 7 years old).  Before the arrest, he lived with his parents, his wife, and his children.  His father was then retired and his mother and wife are both housewives.  The defendant maintained a harmonious relationship with his family.

13.  After he had achieved his education up to the level of higher diploma, the defendant joined the work force.  His last full-time employment was a construction worker, and he earned a salary of around $40,000 per month most of which he contributed to the family as he was the sole breadwinner.

14.  During the covid pandemic, however, the defendant’s salary was affected as the construction job was not stable.  Hence, he borrowed loans from banks to relieve the financial burden.  However, he realized that he was unable to repay the bank.  He foolishly listened to his friend to earn quick money from dangerous drugs to repay his debts and thus committed the present offence.

15.  The defendant is now very remorseful and he realizes that he has caused serious worries and financial burden to his family especially to his wife who now has to take care of his aging parents and his 2 young children.  His father now does part-time jobs to help make ends meet.  The defendant filed for bankruptcy on 29 August 2023 so that his family did not have to bear the burden of repaying his bank loans and debts.

16.  Through his counsel, Ms Maria So, the defendant has submitted to the Court three mitigation letters from his wife, a friend and a pastor respectively.  All three of them wrote to tell the Court that the defendant has a genuine remorse for the serious offence that he has committed and they all pleaded for leniency in sentencing. 

17.  Ms So invited the Court to take the view that the defendant’s role was only following instructions of another person and he was no more than that of a storekeeper cum courier, as he had told the police during his cautioned interviews.  Ms So also stressed that the strongest mitigation in the defendant’s favour is his guilty plea which was entered at the earliest opportunity in the Magistracy.  Ms So also pointed out that the defendant has a clear record.

Sentence

18.  In sentencing the defendant, I will follow the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, bearing in mind also the Court of Appeal’s guidance in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.

19.  The first step is to identify the relevant guideline band applicable to the quantity of the dangerous drugs in question.  In the present case, Ms So accepted that with the total quantity of 21.211 kilogrammes of cocaine, the starting point should be about 28 years and 3 months’ imprisonment: see HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] 2 HKLRD 138 at §62.  That starting point is also confirmed by Mr. Antony Leung, counsel acting for the prosecution.

20.  The second step is to assess the role and culpability of the defendant based upon the Summary of Facts before the Court.  In short, the defendant was observed by police officers to be delivering some dangerous drugs away from Unit 192B where he stored the rest of the dangerous drugs.

21.  The third step is to decide where within the relevant guideline band the defendant should come.  In my assessment, the defendant’s role was that of a storekeeper cum courier.

22.  The fourth step is to deal with aggravating factors, if any.  The defendant has a clear record and I do not find any applicable aggravating factor in the present case.

23.  The fifth step is to take into account the mitigating factors, if any.  As accepted by Ms So, given the seriousness of the trafficking offence, the only mitigating factor in the defendant’s case is his guilty plea which was entered at the earliest opportunity.  Because of that, he is entitled to a full one-third discount.  Therefore, I will reduce the sentence from 28 years and 3 months’ imprisonment by one third to 18 years and 10 months’ imprisonment. 

24.  Lastly, I consider this sentence fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.  Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for 18 years and 10 months.

Exhibits

25.  Order in terms of the Prosecution’s application, not objected to by the Defence, was granted.