COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug before a Magistrate on 9 January this year. The 1st charge alleged that on the 17th day of August 2022, outside Wing Kiu Building on Nathan Road in Yau Ma Tei, he unlawfully trafficked in 27 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic. The 2nd charge alleged that on the same day, at Room 1003 of Hotel 108 in Mong Kok, he unlawfully trafficked in 67.7 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic.
According to the Summary of Facts to which he admitted, at about 9.37 pm on 17 August 2022 he walked out from Hotel 108. At that time he was holding a white paper bag and carrying a black sling bag. He was seen entering a back alley on Waterloo Road. As he walked out of the back alley at 9.43 pm, he was intercepted by the police outside Wing Kiu Building on Nathan Road.
Upon search, the police found in the white paper bag two resealable plastic bags containing all the drug particularised in the 1st charge and also cash of HK$29,550. The police also found on the defendant a receipt addressed to a female for Room 1003 of Hotel 108. Two key cards for the room were found between his underwear and his waist. Three mobile phones, an iPad and cash of HK$2,250 and RMB¥50 were found in his sling bag.
Later that night, the police brought him back to Room 1003 of Hotel 108 for a search. From a safe inside the room, the police found three resealable plastic bags containing all the drug particularised in the 2nd charge, two electronic balances and about 200 empty resealable plastic bags. The fingerprint or DNA of the defendant was not found on any of those items.
In the room, the police also found a box of gloves, a roll of kitchen paper, mobile phones, bottles of water and a receipt dated 3 August 2022 for the purchase of an electronic balance.
The total quantity of dangerous drug found on the defendant and in the room was a total of 96.1 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 94.7 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic.
The total estimated street value of all the drug concerned was HK$56,507.
According to the CCTV recording of the hotel, at 4.19 pm on that day, the defendant conducted registration procedure at the counter and he was joined by a female later. At 4.27 pm that day, the defendant entered Room 1003 and stayed there for about four minutes. Later, at 9.27 pm, he entered the room again and stayed for about five minutes. When he left the room he was holding a white paper bag and carrying a black sling bag.
The defendant now admits and accepts that he was unlawfully trafficking in all the drug particularised in Charge 1 and Charge 2.
The defendant is 32 years of age and he has a clear criminal record. He has received university education and he is single. He had previously worked at a NGO as a clerk earning about $15,000 a month but became unemployed in 2022.
In mitigation, counsel Mr Freddy Woon informed me that the defendant’s father managed a pharmaceutical company in Hong Kong and his mother was a housewife. His younger brother had already migrated to the United Kingdom. Counsel said that there was an inharmonious relationship between the defendant and his parents because the parents expected him to be completely financial independent.
The defendant intended to earn quick money and that was why he committed the present offences. Counsel said that he was recruited by a male on the internet who invited him to be a courier of the drug on the day concerned for a reward of HK$4,000. Counsel said his responsibility was limited to the collection of the drug from the safe in the hotel room and delivery to a designated place according to the instruction of that person.
At the time of his arrest, he was on the way to deliver the drug in the white paper bag and also the cash of HK$29,550. Counsel said the drug found inside the safe in the hotel room would be packed by somebody else and the room was rented by a female. So his role was merely that of a courier and there should be no aggravating feature in this case.
Counsel told me that since his remand in custody he had repaired his relationship with his family. He had also taken up courses on accountancy and Spanish language and completed a course on cognitive psychology. He hoped to be able to help his father’s business upon his discharge.
Counsel also submitted a total of two mitigation letters. The first letter was written by the defendant himself. The defendant said that he deeply regretted about the offences, that he had been reflecting and learning a lot whilst in custody. He had been self-learning in prison and he would never commit any illegal activities again. The defendant said he would like to contribute to his family business upon discharge after the retirement of his parents.
Another letter was written by his parents. They said that they had witnessed the defendant’s heartfelt remorse and urged for leniency on his behalf.
A certificate of completion certifying that he had completed a self-learning cognitive psychology course was also submitted.
In sentencing the defendant, I do bear in mind the approach set out by the Court of Appeal in the cases of HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290 and HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.
I also bear in mind what the Court of Appeal said in the case of HKSAR v Wan Lau Mei [2014] 1 HKC 75. In that case, the court said when sentencing two trafficking offences where different quantities of dangerous drugs were found in the defendant’s possession on the same day but at different locations, the judge should regard the two offences as representing one occasion of possession of the total amount of drugs and impose sentences on both offences for that total, and then make the sentences concurrent with one another. Such an approach would more truly reflect the defendant’s culpability.
This is the approach that I will adopt in sentencing the defendant.
In this case, Charge 1 involves 27 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic, and Charge 2 involves 67.7 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic. So the total quantity of ‘Ice’ narcotic is 94.7 grammes.
According to the revised guidelines in the recent case of HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234, the starting point for trafficking in between 70 and 300 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic is 11 to 15 years’ imprisonment after trial. So the mathematical starting point for trafficking in 94.7 grammes of ‘Ice’ narcotic would be 11 years and 5 months’ imprisonment. The mathematical starting point is appropriate for people at the bottom of the drug hierarchy such as storekeepers and couriers.
On the facts of this case, I accept counsel’s submission that the role of the defendant was merely that of a courier. So I adopt 11 years and 5 months as the overall starting point for all the drug in Charges 1 and 2.
The defendant pleaded guilty to both charges at an early stage, and he is entitled to a full one-third discount. Other than that, I do not see anything in his personal background or family circumstances that would justify any meaningful discount. As such, after the one-third discount, he is sentenced to a total of 7 years and 7 months’ imprisonment for both charges.
Adopting the principles stated in the case of Wan Lau Mei, I adopt 7 years and 7 months as the sentence to be imposed for each of Charge 1 and Charge 2 and order the sentences to run totally concurrent to each other.