|
DCCC 1463/2025
[2026] HKDC 1464
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1463 OF 2025
________________________
________________________
| Before: |
H.H. Judge G. Lam |
| Present: |
Mr. Yuen Siu Kei, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR. |
| |
Mr. Joseph Li of M/s Joseph Li & 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
________________________
The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "drug trafficking". The dangerous drug involved was cocaine.
Summary of Facts
2. About 10:37 a.m. on 11 February 2025, PC 16743 (PW1) was on car patrol with his teammates. He saw a private car XN5381 ("the Car") parked outside No.22 Shan Tung Street in Mongkok. The defendant was the only person in the Car. PW1 approached the Car and asked the defendant to switch off the engine and alight from the Car. She was reluctant to comply.
3. Following further warnings from PW1, the defendant alighted from the Car. PW1 noticed that she had clenched her right hand into a fist. He attempted to grasp it. The defendant dropped a thin transparent resealable plastic bag from her right hand, and it landed on the ground near the Car's left rear tyre. She then used her right foot to sweep it into a nearby ditch. The resealable plastic bag was later found to contain 0.23 gramme of a solid containing 0.21 gramme of cocaine.
4. At 10:45 a.m. on the same day, WPC 13798 (PW2) arrested the defendant for "simple possession". Under caution, the defendant claimed that fearing arrest, she dropped the "coke" onto the ground and tried to sweep it into the ditch. The "coke" was for her own consumption and she asked for a chance.
5. PW2 escorted the defendant to the police car and searched her there. In the defendant's bra, PW2 found a transparent resealable plastic bag containing 23 smaller transparent resealable plastic bags which contained a total of 6.04 grammes of a solid containing 5.46 grammes of cocaine. PW2 arrested the defendant for "trafficking". Under caution, she claimed that the "coke" was for self-consumption.
6. The Car was searched at 11:05 in the same morning. A bag which contained cash in a total sum of $13,060 (consisting of notes in every denomination from $1,000 to $10) was found in the front passenger seat.
7. In her video recorded interview, the defendant admitted that "coke" referred to cocaine. She claimed that she had purchased 24 packs of cocaine from someone named "Ming Jai" for $7,500 at 9:00 a.m. that day. She explained that she had initially placed the drugs in a large plastic bag near the driver's seat. Upon seeing the police, she put the drugs inside her bra. In doing so, one packet might have fallen out of the plastic bag; and she was holding that packet in her right hand when the police stopped her. She then dropped the packet onto the ground and attempted to sweep it into the ditch. The defendant claimed that she could consume the 24 packs of cocaine found within 2 days. The bag of cash found in the Car was her "Lai See" money. She intended to give the cash to her mother as gift.
Mitigation & Sentence
8. The defendant is 38 and single. She has 2 conviction records involving 2 "trafficking" offences and 1 "simple possession" offence. Defence solicitor Mr. Li informed me that the defendant was a salesperson earning about $13,000 per month. She resides with her grandmother, mother and elder brother. In mitigation, Mr. Li submitted that the defendant is a cocaine user. He raised self-consumption as mitigation.
9. Drug abuse has been a long-term problem in our society. A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that "drug trafficking" is a serious crime (be it in the capacity of a seller, courier or storekeeper) and that drug traffickers (even fresh offenders) would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment.
10. The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in cocaine (see Attorney General v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] 2 HKCLR 69 and The Queen v Lau Tak-ming & others [1990] 2 HKLR 370). For up to 10 grammes, the sentence ranges from 2 to 5 years' imprisonment[1].
11. Regarding the defendant's claim for self-consumption, I have reminded myself of the relevant sentencing principles[2]. Mr. Li claimed that 23 out of the 24 packs found were intended for the defendant's own consumption. He submitted that it is consistent what the defendant had said in her video recorded interview.
12. The defendant has one previous conviction of "simple possession" (dated October 2016, which was also her most recent conviction). Her urine sample collected in the morning on 13 February 2025 (almost 48 hours after arrest) showed cocaine positive.
13. I accept that the defendant could be a cocaine user and that a portion of the cocaine found could be for her own consumption. On the other hand, I reject her claim that 23 out of the 24 packs found were intended for self-consumption. Other than her mere assertion, there is insufficient evidence to support such a claim. In her video recorded interview, the defendant claimed that she smoked cocaine 10 times a day (with each dose consisting of 0.2 gramme), adding that a pack cost about $400. In other words, she would have spent $4,000 a day on cocaine. Even on her own account, she purchased 24 packs for $7,500, and 24 packs could last her 2 days. Her daily expenditure on cocaine would still be $3,750. Based on what I was told about her income, I find that financially impossible.
14. The defendant trafficked in 5.67 grammes of cocaine. Applying a strict arithmetical approach, the appropriate starting point is 3 years and 8 months' imprisonment. I will grant her a nominal discount of 2 months for self-consumption, reducing the starting point to 42 months[3]. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. With the timely guilty plea, I sentence the defendant to 28 months' imprisonment.
[1] The present case predates HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] 2 HKLRD 138.
[2] See HKSAR v Chow Chun Sang [2012] 2 HKLRD 1121; HKSAR v Wong Suet Hau & another [2002] 1 HKLRD 69 and HKSAR v Cheuk Kin Man CACC 294/2009 (English translation).
[3] In Chow Chun Sang (supra), Yeung VP held "…when all or part of the drugs are intended for the trafficker’s own consumption, the ensuing discount to sentence should, depending on circumstances, fall somewhere between 10% and 25% of the basic starting point. In determining the extent of discount in a particular case, the court should have regard to factors including the total quantities of the drugs involved, proportion of the drugs intended for self-use, the nature of the drugs, whether the drug trafficking was for financial gain…" (para.19, p.1126) In HKSAR v Cheung Wai Man [2019] 1 HKLRD 817, Zervos JA held "We should point out that a sentencing court, in any event, has a discretion to discount a sentence to reflect an element of self-consumption." (para.50, p.829).
|