|
DCCC 361/2014
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 361 OF 2014
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v |
|
| |
Kwong Kar-chun |
|
| ---------------------- |
| Before: |
HH Judge Casewell |
| Date: |
5 September 2014 at 10.33 am |
| Present: |
Mr John Hemmings, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr Lam Yuet Iu, Herman, of C O Yu & 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 has pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The drug concerned is ketamine and the total alleged is 18.70 grammes of that drug.
2. The offence occurred on 24 February 2014. The defendant was seen by a police officer to be acting furtively on the 4th floor of a property in Argyle Street and the drug was found on his person and was contained in 14 transparent resealable bags. There were another 29 transparent resealable bags also found on him.
3. Under caution, the defendant admitted helping someone to deliver the ketamine as he needed money. He made a further video-recorded interview and gave further details. He was holding the drugs for another person and he would get $500 for that.
4. The drugs themselves are valued at $3,053.66 and the defendant admitted the drugs were in his possession for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.
5. The defendant’s personal circumstances showed him to be aged 26 and educated to Secondary 5 level. He was discharged from Hei Lin Chau Drug Addiction Treatment Centre on 3 October 2011. He is understood to be addicted to the drug and that is borne out by his criminal record which has convictions for possession of a dangerous drug resulting in the defendant being sent to the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre on 3 September and then later on 24 November of 2010.
6. In mitigation, the defendant says he was merely holding the drug for another person and is prepared to assist the police in respect of any investigation they have into drug trafficking. All I can say at this stage is the defendant has showed willingness but there is no product, it has not come to any fruition at this stage but it clearly shows the defendant’s remorse and his desire to assist the police.
7. The possession of a quantity of drugs such as this is subject to guidelines from the appellant courts. The quantity here is 18.70 grammes of ketamine which puts it in the range of 10 to 50 grammes of the drug with a sentencing range of between 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment. Simply calculating by way of quantity, it would put the defendant’s starting point for sentence towards the lower end of that range.
8. Now I take into account this is the defendant’s first conviction for trafficking. He has unfortunately become involved in this area of criminality through his own addiction which has not been successfully treated. The defendant has shown remorse and a desire to assist the authorities. I consider given those factors I will take a starting point at the lowest part of the guideline sentencing range which is a sentence of 4 years’ imprisonment or 48 months. The defendant is entitled to a one‑third discount from that sentence which leaves a final sentence of 32 months’ imprisonment.
|
(T Casewell)
|
|
District Judge |
|