HKSAR v. TAI CHEUK KIN AND ANOTHER

DCCC1252/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1252 OF 2011

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

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

Reasons for Sentence (for D1)

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

1.  D1, you have pleaded guilty to three charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance. They are Charges 1, 2 and 3 on the indictment. On Charges 2 and 3 you are jointly charged with the 2nd defendant. On Charge 1 you are solely charged.

2.  The dates of the charges in Charge 1 is 30 May 2011; Charge 2, 11 July 2011; and Charge 3, 14 July 2011.  On all three charges you trafficked in the drug “ice”, and on each occasion you sold drugs to an undercover police officer at the Ting Ping Estate in Sheung Shui, New Territories.

3.  The modus for the offence was that the undercover police officer, would telephone you, and you would then ask if he wanted to buy “ice” thereafter you would then arrange to meet and the drugs would be sold.

4.  On the 1st charge you sold the drugs which were in the amount of 0.46 grammes of crystalline solid containing 0.44 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride to the officer at $600.  You were accompanied by another unknown male. In Charge 2, the officer phoned you again.  You agreed to sell “ice” to him.  You then instructed the 2nd defendant to go down to meet the officer.  The 2nd defendant sold the “ice” to the officer.  The quantity there was 0.24 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 0.23 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

5.  The same arrangement applied for the 3rd charge.  On that occasion the amount of drugs was 0.51 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 0.48 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.  On each of these occasions the undercover officer paid $600.  For the 2nd and 3rd charges you then rewarded the 2nd defendant as your courier by giving him $70 under the 2nd charge and $50 under the 3rd charge. 

6.  Your counsel, Mr Sunny Chan, has made full and thorough mitigation on your behalf.  I have taken into account all that he has had to say.  You are 22 years of age, and you have a number of previous convictions, that is five in total, which includes robbery, two for theft and two for possession of dangerous drugs.  For all those offences you were originally put on probation.  You went to Rehabilitation Centre once.  For the last conviction of possession of dangerous drugs you were sentenced to the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre in September 2009. 

7.  I am informed that your father passed away when you were six years old.  You live with your mother, who has no job, and younger brother, also who is unemployed.  You have no fixed regular employment but worked as a casual worker, and earned approximately $8,000 a month.  You contributed about half of your earnings to your mother.  I am also informed from Mr Chan that you are a drug addict.  At the time of the offences which you have committed you were still a drug addict. 

8.  Mr Chan has informed me that he has advised you that these are serious offences, and there are specific tariffs and guidelines laid down by the Court of Appeal, and inevitably you understand that the only sentence open to me is one of a sentence of imprisonment.  You no doubt understand that trafficking is a very serious offence.  You have been in and out of the courts for many years now, almost ten years, and it appears that none of the previous sentences had any deterrent effect on you.  Instead of being a more law abiding citizen, you have become less law abiding and have involved yourself in more severe and serious offences such as this offence of trafficking.

9.  What is aggravating about this case so far as you are concerned is that you involved a youngster to be your mule or courier. People like you deserve much more severe and heavier sentences as you bring the innocent youth into committing severe offences.  He was prepared to do this for such menial sums of $50 and $70.  As a result of his involvement with you, he is now looking also at a long term of incarceration.  On his first conviction in court he is looking at an immediate loss of liberty.  Unlike yourself, since 2003 till 2009 it appears you did not lose your liberty despite the number of offences you had committed.

10.  You have probably felt that you have got away with your crimes so far and were therefore pushing the borders.  Making fast money is almost always sceptical and illegal.  There is no way of earning easy quick money without it being illegal.  You appear to be fairly healthy, apart from your drug dependency, and your mother and your younger brother is unemployed.  It is about time you get on your feet and earn a proper living. 

11.  Defendant, as you know, there are clear tariffs for trafficking in the drug “ice”.  In following those tariffs as laid down by the Court of Appeal I sentence you to the following. 

12.  For Charge 1, the starting point for that quantity of “ice” would be 39 months imprisonment.  For Charge 2, for that quantity of “ice” would be a starting point of 36 months’ imprisonment.  For Charge 3, for that amount of drugs is a starting point of 39 months’ imprisonment.  You have, however, pleaded guilty to those three charges, therefore I must give you full credit for you plea and reduce those terms by one-third. 

13.  Therefore, on Charge 1, you are sentenced to 26 months’ imprisonment, Charge 2, 24 months’ imprisonment, and Charge 3, 26 months’ imprisonment.  I do not consider that these sentences should run entirely concurrent to each other.  As I have said earlier, the aggravating factor in this case is that you brought in an innocent youth into this very, very serious offence of trafficking, and for that there should be a further punishment. 

14.  Therefore, two months of Charge 3 is to run consecutive to Charge 1, and the remaining terms to run concurrent to each other, which makes it a total term of imprisonment of 28 months, to which you are so sentenced.