|
DCCC 925/2016
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 925 OF 2016
------------------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v |
|
| |
WONG PUI WO KENNY |
|
------------------------------
| Present: |
Ms Nisha Mohamed, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR |
|
Ms Manyi Tsang instructed by Messrs Yung, Yu, Yuen & Co. 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 was convicted after trial of one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, the drugs involved are 31.3 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 3.54 grammes of methamphetamine (commonly known as ice).
2. At around 18:10 hours on 17 August 2016, a detective stopped the defendant in the street near Wo Yue House, Fung Wo Estate, Shatin for a search and found the drugs in question in the defendant’s shorts pocket. The drugs were put in a single re-sealable bag and wrapped in tissue. Also found on him are a mobile phone and cash $174.50.
3. The street value of the drugs is estimated to be $10,830.
4. The defendant, aged 49, is a married man with a 6-year-old son. He is currently a divorcee. He has amassed 17 previous convictions, the majority of which are to do with dishonestly offences. Only one of them is drug related and trafficking is his first offence of which he was convicted by this Court. Counsel for the defendant submitted that as the drugs were packaged into a single bag which suggested that they would not be spread to many people. It is unlikely the drugs would find their ways into the lower tier of the general public. Counsel also points out that this is his first offence of trafficking, and reminds the Court that the defendant is a habitual drug user, and asks the Court be as lenient as possible.
5. There are sentencing guidelines for this type of offence, for trafficking in an amount up to 10 grammes of ice, a term of 3 to 7 years is to be considered.
6. Having heard all the mitigation put forward, I see no good reason to depart from the sentencing guidance as set down by the higher court. For the amount the defendant was found trafficking, i.e. 3.54 grammes of methamphetamine, I take 53 months as the starting point.
7. The defendant is convicted after trial, and is therefore not entitled to any discount for a guilty plea. As far as his mitigation is concerned, there isn’t any substantial mitigation available to him. And therefore, the defendant is sentenced to 53 months imprisonment.
|