HKSAR v. CHAN KWOK KEUNG

DCCC 689/2023

[2024] HKDC 620

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 689 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to a total of four charges this morning. The charges are dangerous driving, driving a motor vehicle with an alcohol concentration exceeding the prescribed limit, driving a motor vehicle with any concentration of a specified illicit drug, and finally, driving a motor vehicle failing to display standard registration mark.

2.  The facts have been agreed and the Summary of Facts to which the defendant has agreed show the basis of sentencing today originate out of a police roadblock which is at a location on the Tsing Kwai Highway and the offences occurred in the early hours of 31 December 2022, particularly round about 5.15 in the morning. The defendant’s vehicle was seen and indicated by a police officer to stop and on that occurring the defendant accelerated his vehicle away from the police roadblock. Another police vehicle gave pursuit to the defendant and following from that a police chase ensued and it is during the course of that chase that the 1^st offence of dangerous driving was committed.

3.  The particulars of that offence which occurred over a period of some 8 minutes and 52 seconds and over a distance of around 13 kilometres, can be seen from the Agreed Facts which were that the defendant accelerated to high speeds while escaping, was seen to have crossed white lines and also driven through a red traffic light.

4.  At the time when the defendant did all these things, he had an excess of alcohol in his system and had also consumed an illicit drug. Clearly, that factually establishes the offence of dangerous driving and shows the seriousness of the conduct of the defendant.

5.  Some more detail in respect of those particulars are that when the chase was initiated, the defendant drove off towards the Tuen Mun direction, was seen to cross a broken white line at high speed. The defendant’s speed at that time was around about 130 kilometres per hour in an area where the relevant section was 80 kilometres per hour speed limit. The defendant also then entered the Tin Kau Bridge and accelerated up to a speed of some 150 kilometres per hour, again where the speed limit was 80 kilometres per hour.

6.  The chase continued over the bridge. The defendant then went on to the Tuen Mun Road at a speed of 100 kilometres per hour where there is a limit of 70 kilometres per hour and then he continued along the Tuen Mun Road, accelerated to speeds of around 130 kilometres per hour. The defendant travelled into other lanes and overtook other vehicles whilst being chased. The defendant’s vehicle was seen to go to the Tuen Mun slip road towards Sham Cheng and seen to cross a continuous double white line at that point. Further on the defendant jumped a red traffic light then travelled into a looped tunnel towards the Tuen Mun Road. The vehicle eventually accelerated away towards the Tin Kau Bridge again at the speed of around 100 kilometres per hour in an area where the speed limit was 80 kilometres per hour.

7.  Eventually the defendant’s vehicle was intercepted by reinforcing police vehicles on the Cheung Tsing Highway. The defendant’s vehicle was then taken over to the hard shoulder.

8.  Following that, the defendant was arrested on dangerous driving, tests both for alcohol and drugs were found to be taken on the defendant. The defendant, when he got off the vehicle, was found to be strongly smelling of alcohol and his eyes were red. Initial screening was conducted and then a further screening was conducted at the Tsing Yi Police Station, the result of 101 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath on the first specimen and 100 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath on the second specimen. That puts the defendant in what is described as Tier 3 in terms of disqualification. The defendant was then arrested for drink driving.

9.  Later on, round about 7 o’clock in the morning, the defendant was subject to tests for drugs and a later Chemist’s Certificate has been produced that confirmed the blood specimen of the defendant contained 0.01 microgrammes of cocaine per millilitre of blood and 0.09 microgrammes of benzoylecgonine, a metabolite derived from cocaine, per millilitre blood at 0.01 microgrammes ecgonine methyl ester, a metabolite derived from cocaine, per millilitre of blood.

10.  Finally, in respect of the 4^th charge, when the defendant’s vehicle was examined on 2 January 2023 at Tai Lam, various defects were found which constitute the 4^th charge. The defendant admitted he was the registered owner of the vehicle, responsible for the vehicle’s repair and maintenance. He admitted driving the vehicle on the occasion in question and said he could not remember the roadblock and was only aware of the police chasing him when he reached the Tsing Kau Bridge.

11.  The defendant fully admits all four charges. The defendant has clearly admitted these charges from the early stage from the initial point at which he was arrested.

12.  As far as the defendant’s antecedents as recorded by the police are concerned, the defendant is 42 years old. He has one old conviction in 2008 in respect of possession of drugs when he was simply fined $1,000. I do not consider that to be a relevant conviction for sentencing today. Defendant is also a graduate of the Lingnan University with a Bachelor’s Degree in Economics in 2003, has worked as an administrative assistant in the Post Office, as an English tutor and then as an insurance agent. He is single and resides with his parents.

13.  The defendant has some compelling mitigation. He is described as having an excellent background. Initially described as a clear record, there is that conviction in the past but it does not seem to be relevant to his life from that point onwards. He clearly made a good life for himself. He was only 41 years old at the time of the offences, has a stable job, he has worked as an insurance agent for many years and is earning good money in that job. His title is presently Senior District Manager with people under his charge.

14.  His family background, of late his parents have retired and his father suffered some illness which has made the defendant the breadwinner of that family unit.

15.  I recall so be seen from the defendant’s mitigation letters that he has been involved in various charitable activities and also he has provided details of drug tests which show that he is drug free, certainly in the last year.

16.  The defendant committed these offences as a result of what I think we can describe as a night’s partying. He drank to excess and then sampled some cocaine at the same time.

17.  As far as his mitigation is concerned, he asks for the court to note that there have been no persons injured or any damage to any vehicle as a result of the police chase that occurred on that evening, that he is not a habitual user of dangerous drugs, that he pleaded guilty at the earliest possible opportunity and significantly for the defendant is the career effect of the conviction. I am told that it is likely that his insurance agent’s license will be suspended as a result of this which means it will be difficult for him to earn a living, certainly a living of the standard that he was earning prior to committing these offences and being convicted. It is a significant reduction in his source of income for the future.

18.  I take all these factors into account. I do take into account, of course, the nature of the defendant’s driving which puts this in a very serious category. The risks of driving at that speed in those locations are high and the defendant clearly had drunk and had taken drugs while driving which puts it into an even more serious category and that is acknowledged in the statutory format and we can see from Section 37(2E)  of the Road Traffic Ordinance the maximum terms of imprisonment and the minimum disqualification periods in respect of the 1^st charge are increased by 50% due to the circumstances of aggravation, that is the consumption of drugs at the time of committing the offences. I bear in mind all those factors and I bear in mind particularly the serious effect that any sentence of imprisonment will have on this defendant and his future. Nevertheless, the court must recognise the seriousness of the offences which he has committed. I will proceed to sentence as follows.

19.  On the 1^st charge, a sentence of immediate imprisonment must be imposed. I take a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment. I will reduce that to 10 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. There will be a 2 year disqualification from driving and the defendant must take and complete a driving improvement course within the last 3 months of his period of disqualification.

20.  On the 2^nd charge, I will take a starting point of 4.5 months’ imprisonment, reduce that to 3 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. There will be a disqualification period of 2 years on that charge.

21.  On charge 3, again I will take a starting point of 4.5 months’ imprisonment, reduce that to 3 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. There will further be a 2 year disqualification on that charge.

22.  On the 4^th charge, there will be a fine of $1,000.

23.  I will order that all sentences of imprisonment and all disqualifications will run concurrently.