HKSAR v. MO CHOR KIN

DCCC 659/2024

[2025] HKDC 611

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 659 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Possession of dangerous drugs". The dangerous drugs involved are ICE, cocaine, cannabis resin and heroin.

Summary of Facts

2.  About 12:45 a.m. on 27 November 2023, PC 28314 (PW1)  and other police officers intercepted respectively the defendant and 3 other males outside Shop No.G36, Ground Floor, Nos.15-19 Cheung Mong Road, Mongkok for enquiry.

3.  Upon search, the following items were found in a blue case contained in a bag carried by the defendant :-

(i)  4 plastic bags which contained a total of 2.02 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 2.01 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride (collectively E1);

(ii)  6 plastic bags which contained a total of 1.72 grammes of a solid containing 1.67 grammes of cocaine (collectively E2);

(iii)  1 plastic packet containing 4.29 grammes of cannabis resin (E3);

(iv)  1 paper packet which contained 0.03 gramme of a mixture containing heroin hydrochloride (E4);

(v)  1 plastic packet which contained 0.12 gramme of a mixture containing 0.08 gramme of heroin hydrochloride (E5);

(vi)  1 paper packet consisting of plastic wrappings which contained 0.13 gramme of a mixture containing 0.09 gramme of heroin hydrochloride (E6);

(vii)  1 plastic packet which contained 0.09 gramme of a solid containing methamphetamine (E7);

(viii)  8 empty resealable plastic bags; and

(ix)  an electronic scale.

4.  PW1 arrested the defendant for "Trafficking".  Under caution, he claimed that all the drugs contained in the blue case were for his own consumption.  Since nothing suspicious was found on the other 3 males, the Police did not arrest them.

5.  In his video recorded interview, the defendant claimed that the dangerous drugs found were packed in the way as they were when he purchased them.  He was a cleaner earning $18,000 per month.

Mitigation & Sentence

6.  The defendant is 60 and has 23 conviction records which included 17 "simple possession" offences and 5 "trafficking" offences.  His latest conviction is dated December 2021, a "trafficking" offence for which he was sentenced to 27 months' imprisonment.  Defence counsel Mr. Ng informed me that the defendant is a widower.  His wife of his 2^nd marriage passed away around 2008/2009.  He has a son (aged about 30)  from his 1^st marriage, but they are no longer in contact.  The defendant lives alone now and was a cleaner earning about $18,000 per month.

7.  In mitigation, Mr. Ng submitted that the defendant was cooperative with the Police and pleaded guilty in a timely fashion.  Regarding the latent risk of trafficking, Mr. Ng submitted that the defendant's urine test report (sample taken on 28 February 2024; 2 days after his re-arrest)  showed amphetamine, cocaine and opiate positive.  Hence, it is likely that the drugs found in the present case were for his consumption.  In other words, the risk of dissemination is low.

8.  As expected, having been remanded in jail custody for over a year, the defendant's DATC Report indicated that he is no longer a drug dependant and thus not suitable for admission. 

9.  In the present case, primarily 2.01 grammes of ICE (E1; contained in 4 plastic bags), 1.67 grammes of cocaine (E2; contained in 6 plastic bags)  and 4.29 grammes of cannibas resin (E3; contained in 1 plastic packet)  were involved.  E4 to E6 contained less than 0.18 gramme of heroin hydrochloride in total; whereas E7, only a negligible amount of methamphetamine.  E1 to E7 were found in a small case contained in a bag carried by the defendant.

10.  When determining the proper starting point, I have borne in mind the principles laid down in HKSAR v Wan Sheung Sum [2000] 1 HKLRD 405.  First, the defendant is a repeated offender of "simple possession".  For the different quantities and types of the drugs involved, I adopt a starting point of 16 months' imprisonment.  Second, the packaging and quantity of E1 and E2 indicated that they were ready for trafficking.  Also, the defendant has previous convictions of "trafficking".  Hence, I consider the latent risk moderate to high.  I will add 5 months to reflect it.  The starting point thus becomes 21 months.  With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 14 months.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction.  I sentence the defendant to 14 months' imprisonment.

11.  The defendant first transgressed the law at the age of 24 in 1988 for a drug offence.  From 1994 onwards, he has spent most of his time in and out of prison, except when he managed stay out of trouble for a few years between about 1999 and 2004.  The court can only do so much in deterring a repeated offender by way of a heavy penalty.  Whilst the sentence must carry a deterrent effect, it cannot go out of proportion.  The defendant is already 60. To live a law-abiding life with dignity or to continue being a criminal is a matter entirely for him.