|
DCCC1124/2011
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1124 OF 2011
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Cheung Yee-king |
|
| ---------------------- |
Before: H H Judge Browne
Date: 12 January 2012 at 9.55 am
Present:
|
Ms Jessie Sham, PP of the
Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Ms Sim Siow Eng, Suzanne, instructed by Messrs CMK Lawyers, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
Offence: Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in 15.18 grammes of ketamine.
2. The facts of the case were that on 23 August 2011 at 11.30 the defendant was spotted by two officers acting furtively outside the ground floor of Sea View House in Chung Hing San Street in Cheung Chau.
3. He was stopped and searched and found to be in possession of 60 packets of dangerous drugs the subject of the charge. He said that he been asked by a friend to carry the stuff and deliver the drugs to another person. The drugs were worth approximately $2,606.
4. The defendant has two previous convictions, both drug related. Both of them were for possession of dangerous drugs. The first conviction was in 2003 when he was dealt with by way of a fine; the second offence was committed 6 years later in 2009 when he was sentenced to probation for a period of 12 months.
5. The defendant is 26 years of age. He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 3 level. He has been in employment as a gas delivery worker, earning $9,000 per month. Both his parents are in employment, his father as a construction worker and his mother as a casual worker. I am told that he has three younger siblings and that he has an 80-year-old grandmother.
6. The only real mitigation in this case is that the defendant has pleaded guilty at an early stage and he was co-operative with the police.
7. A number of letters of support have been placed before the court - a letter from the defendant; one from his employer and one from his parents.
8. The defendant says that he is very remorseful for the offence and also very concerned about the anxiety he has caused to his family and his friends. He says that a few years ago he borrowed a substantial amount of money, $37,500, and he is in financial difficulties because of that loan and it was under that financial pressure that he started to take drugs. I am told that he has now met a pastor who is guiding him to the right path and intends to give up drugs when he is released.
9. A letter from the defendant’s employer praises him for his diligence and hard-working ethic.
10. There is also a letter from the parents of the defendant and in that letter they say that they have worked very hard to support their four children. They apologise to the court for the difficulties in which the defendant finds himself and feel that they were responsible for that. They feel that because of the fact that both of them were working they failed to give the defendant the necessary support that he needed. They described the defendant, who is their eldest son, as being naive and innocent and started to take drugs because of mixing with dubious peers on Cheung Chau. I have the greatest sympathy with the parents. It must be very frustrating for them. It is very difficult for parents to control who their children mix with.
11. The defendant, however, in my view, is very much the author of his own misfortune. He has been before the court on two occasions already and has been dealt with leniently. He was fined in 2003 for possession of dangerous drugs. At that time, the case would had been adjourned for reports and it would have been brought home to him how serious possession of drugs is.
12. As recently as 2009, he was again before the court for possession of drugs and was dealt most leniently by way of probation. In my view, with the previous conviction, he was fortunate not to be sent to the Drugs Addiction Treatment Centre. In retrospect, that might had been the right decision. It might have finally brought home to him how serious taking drugs is.
13. Counsel for the defendant has referred to the appropriate tariff for sentences for cases of trafficking in ketamine. The Court of Appeal have laid down guidelines which state that for trafficking in the quantity of drugs the defendant was found in possession of the appropriate sentence is between 4 and 6 years.
14. The reason why the courts takes such a view of cases of this type is that drugs cause enormous social, family and economic problems in Hong Kong and people who traffic in drugs can expect no mercy from the courts.
15. The mitigation in this case, obviously the defendant will get a third off for his guilty plea, but also I accept the argument put forward by defence counsel that the defendant is a drug addict and part of the drugs would have been used for his own consumption.
16. I have decided therefore to impose a starting point at the lower end of the sentencing range. I take a starting point of 4 years and 3 months’ imprisonment. The defendant is entitled to a reduction of one-third for his guilty plea.
17. The sentence therefore that will be imposed is a sentence of 34 months’ imprisonment.
|