HKSAR v. TSANG CHI CHEUNG

HCCC 153/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 153 OF 2015

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134 of the Laws of Hong Kong.

The drug concerned is methamphetamine hydrochloride. The amount referred to the indictment admitted by you is substantial: 981 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 958 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. This is a drug which is colloquially referred to as ‘Ice’.

The summary of facts admitted reveals that sometime after midnight on 3 December 2014, police officers executed a search warrant at premises on the 1st floor of the Fook Shun Building, 45-67 Ma Wang Road, Yuen Long in the New Territories. You were the registered tenant of those premises and you were the only person present when the officers arrived.

A search of the premises revealed that it was being used for the packaging of dangerous drugs. Of that there can be no doubt. There were a number of transparent resealable plastic bags containing what was suspected to be dangerous drugs found. An electronic scale, together with paraphernalia for packaging of dangerous drugs, were strewn throughout the room, together with a quantity of resealable plastic bags. Significantly, in the context of this charge, there was cash in the sum of $42,500 found.

The police officers suspected that the dangerous drugs concerned was methamphetamine hydrochloride. When you were arrested at the scene, you said in response to being cautioned, “Ah Sir, the ‘Ice’ belongs to me, I intend to sell them to others, please give me a chance.”

Subsequent analysis of the content of the plastic bags revealed that the police officers’ suspicions were correct and that in total there were 27 plastic bags containing ‘Ice’, and the amount in total is as I have indicated, 958 grammes.

It is agreed that the retail value of this quantity of ‘Ice’ was estimated to be almost $429,000.

Subsequent to your arrest, you told the police officers something of your own circumstances, which included the fact that you were yourself a user of ‘Ice’ and that you were engaged in the packaging and sale of it. You gave some then vague details of the supplier of ‘Ice’ to you and the arrangements whereby you shared the profits of the sale of ‘Ice’ that you had packaged. It is very clear to me that you were engaged in the trafficking of dangerous drugs in a substantial way.

The criminal record which is before the court indicates that you have a number of offences ranging back to your late teens. Some of these are triad-related. More importantly, it is clear that you have been involved in the use of dangerous drugs since at least the year 2001. You have on two occasions been sentenced to attend a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre.

Insofar as mitigation is concerned, your counsel has helpfully placed before the court a skeleton argument, attached to which are letters on your behalf from members of your family. In addition to the matters contained in the skeleton submission, I am advised by your counsel that you were previously employed as a decoration worker from time to time and that you had, subsequent to your leaving secondary school, been trained in that field. Nevertheless, your involvement with dangerous drugs overtook that.

She emphasises that in the video-recorded interviews that you gave you made full admissions to the charges, and that the prosecution were advised as early as 20 November of last year of your intention to plead guilty. It has been pointed out that you have provided a non-prejudicial statement to the authorities with information relating to your knowledge of dangerous drugs and those involved in that field. Regrettably, from your perspective, that has not led to any arrest or discovery such as would justify a discount in addition to that which would normally be provided for your plea of guilty.

I am further asked on your behalf to take into account the fact that some of these drugs would be used for your own consumption.

Given the vast quantity of drugs concerned, it is my opinion that that amount would be minimal in the circumstances and should not, in any way, impact upon the discount which will be provided for your plea of guilty nor, indeed, from the starting point for sentence.

Turning now to the question of sentence to be imposed.

The amount of methamphetamine hydrochloride trafficked by you exceeds the upper sentencing levels originally provided for in the Court of Appeal in Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 123. In the light of the amounts of drugs being sentenced, the Court of Appeal in Tam Yi Chun in 2014 provided additional guidance to sentences for sentencing where the amount of drugs trafficked exceeded those original guidelines.

In Tam Yi Chun, the Court of Appeal advised sentences when sentencing for the quantities of methamphetamine hydrochloride to apply the parameters that had been advised for heroin in HKSAR v Abdallah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437. In Abdallah, the Court of Appeal indicated that when sentencing for the drug heroin, amounts between 600 and 1,200 grammes, starting points for sentence after trial should be in the range of 20 to 23 years. Both the prosecutor and your counsel accept that those guidelines apply in the instant case.

In my opinion, the amount of methamphetamine hydrochloride would require me to have a starting point of 22 years after trial from which you would be entitled to a full one-third discount to reflect your plea of guilty.

There is nothing in any of the matters before me or the circumstances of the commission of this offence which would permit me to grant to you any discount from that starting point in excess of that one-third.

That being the case, the appropriate sentence, in my opinion, is one of 14 years and 8 months’ imprisonment, and that is the sentence that I impose.