HKSAR v. WONG KAI LUNG

DCCC 761/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 761 OF 2016

----------------------

----------------------

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

---------------------

1.  The defendant, Mr Wong, has pleaded guilty to one offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The details of that are firstly there was a solid which contained 13.70 grammes of the narcotic cocaine. There was also another what in fact were 10.5 grammes of a powder which contained only traces of cocaine and 0.08 grammes of another powder which contained ketamine.

2.  The defendant has accepted the facts.  Those facts show that the defendant was found wandering in a corridor in Po Lam Estate in Tseung Kwan O on 15 June 2016.  Subsequent to that, his residence at Room 933 of the Po Ning House was searched, and various items were found, and on a vanity table in the defendant’s bedroom was found a large transparent resealable plastic bag which contained 72 transparent resealable plastic bags which contained totally narcotic content of 13.7 grammes of cocaine.  Also, three transparent resealable bags were found which contained 10.5 grammes of a powder which contained sucrose and some traces of ketamine.  There was also a piece of folded paper that contained 0.08 grammes of a powder which contained ketamine.  There was a silver electronic scale and a large number of resealable plastic bags, totally 65 resealable plastic bags of different sizes and 4 packets of resealable plastic bags.

3.  The defendant was arrested.  He immediately said under caution that the drugs found were cocaine and ketamine, and they were for his own consumption.  He said he had purchased them from a person called Ah Ying. 

4.  The defendant expanded on those admissions in a further video-recorded interview where he gave further details of how he obtained these drugs from Ah Ying.  The defendant did say he was a drug addict of cocaine and ketamine and would take cocaine 10 to 20 times a day, consuming five to six bags of cocaine.

5.  The street value of the cocaine that was found is valued at $17,160.  The street value of the traces of ketamine and the powder ketamine is valued at $2,285.

6.  The defendant admits that he possessed all those drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking in them.

7.  As far as the defendant’s background is concerned, he is aged 34.  He has four previous convictions.  The most relevant for this case are that in 2007 he was sentenced to a sentence of imprisonment for possession of dangerous drugs and then in 2009 for the same offence was sentenced to a drug addiction treatment centre.  And these convictions sentence, the last two convictions support the defendant’s contention before me that he is a drug addict and has been for some time, and that is borne out by a background report obtained on the defendant.  Over the past years, he has become more dependent on ketamine and cocaine and that in order to have enough dosage to consume for himself, he was committing the offence of trafficking in the drug as well.

8.  The defendant says that he would like to use the time of any sentence of imprisonment to rid himself of his drug addiction.  It is to be hoped he can do that because should he rid himself of his addiction, it would be unlikely I think that he would find himself before the courts again.  He has found work in the past as a transportation worker and a construction site worker.

9.  Also in support of the defendant’s contention that he was a consumer of the drug is the test, the urine test conducted on him on his admission into Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre where he tested positive for the cocaine which he has told the court he was consuming at the time.  

10.  As far as sentence is concerned, the starting points for sentence in respect of the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug are governed by guideline sentencing.  What we have here is 13.7 grammes of cocaine and a smaller quantity, in fact small quantity of the drug ketamine.  Clearly, the starting point for the drug cocaine would be the appropriate starting point to take in this case, and that is governed by the starting point for the drug heroin as set out in the case of Lau Tak Ming.

11.  This places the quantity of drug in the guideline bracket of 10 to 50 grammes of the drug which is between 5 to 8 years’ imprisonment.  The amount of ketamine, sorry, in this case is somewhat negligible.  It simply is 0.08 grammes and some traces.  Even when added to the starting point for cocaine would not in any way substantially alter the correct starting point.  So it is appropriate in this case the starting point for sentence for the defendant lies somewhere between 5 to 8 years’ imprisonment.

12.  Although the defendant is a long-term addict, this is his first involvement before the court for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug.  His previous case has been in relation to possession of that drug, and it shows a deterioration in the nature of his addiction.  However, it is a first offence of trafficking, and I will take a starting point at a lower point of the guideline.

13.  My starting point for sentence will be 60 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant has various mitigating factors that must be taken into account.  Firstly, it is his self-consumption of the drug and, secondly, it is his plea of guilty.  As far as the self-consumption is concerned, that is a legitimate ground for mitigating sentence.  He then gave some details of his consumption of the drug in mitigation and also in the video-recorded interview.  Suffice it to say based on what the defendant’s mitigation is concerned, he would consume a significant quantity of the cocaine.  He said of the packets that were found, he would consume about 20 packets for his own consumption.

14.  The level of consumption required for a discount on the basis of self-consumption must be significant although the amount of course will be somewhat speculative because the defendant has not yet consumed it.  Based on the defendant’s mitigation, based on his urine test and based on his long-term addiction, I consider the defendant would no doubt have consumed a significant proportion of this drug.

15.  The deduction for this kind of mitigation can lie between 10 to 25 per cent of the original starting point.  I shall take a figure in the region of 15 per cent which leads to a 9-month deduction from the original starting point.  The starting point for sentence will now be one of 51 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is entitled to a one-third discount from that figure.  By my calculation, that is a further 17-month deduction.  This will lead to a final sentence of 34 months’ imprisonment for the defendant.  That will be my sentence.