HKSAR v. CHEUNG TIN YEUNG

 DCCC1293/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1293 OF 2009

 ----------------------

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you pleaded guilty to a single offence of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to sections 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

2.  Briefly, the facts were as follows.  At about 2 pm on 25 August 2009, PW1, a police officer, saw you come from Flat C, 2nd Floor, Shing Ho Building, 25 Shing Ho Road, Tai Wai.  You were holding two paper boxes of drinks.

3.  You were intercepted and you went back into the flat.  A body search revealed a packet of suspected dangerous drugs from your front left trousers pocket.  You admitted also that the two drinks boxes also contained ketamine.  PW1 opened the two paper boxes and in the first found 10 packets of suspected dangerous drugs, P2, and five packets of suspected dangerous drugs, P3.  In the other, seven packets of suspected dangerous drugs, P4, and five packets of suspected dangerous drugs, P5.

4.  Under arrest and caution you said, “Ah Sir, these K Chai are for my own consumption.  Give me a chance.”

5.  Another officer, PW2, searched  the room and found eight plastic bags containing traces of suspected dangerous drugs, P6, in a washing basin. 

6.  Also found were electronic scales, plastic gloves and a number of plastic bags, which you admitted under caution to be intended to carry ketamine.

7.  Interviewed under caution you claimed the drugs were for your own consumption.

8.  Later analysis revealed that P1 contained 5.74 grammes of powder containing 2.42 grammes of ketamine; P2, 133.24 grammes of powder containing 49.03 grammes of ketamine; P3, 12.54 grammes of powder containing 5.98 grammes of ketamine; P4, 93.29 grammes of powder containing 41.91 grammes of ketamine; P5, 12.84 grammes of powder containing 6.06 grammes of ketamine; and P6 contained traces of ketamine.  The total amount of ketamine was 105.4 grammes.

9.  You admitted to three previous convictions, all on the same occasion, two of which involved dangerous drugs.  Indeed, one of those offences was an offence of trafficking.

10.  I adjourned the case for the taking of a Probation Officer’s Background Report.  I did this in view of your relative youth.  That report is now before the court.  It has been read by me and I understand its contents to be agreed by you.  In essence, the report itself is somewhat neutral, being neither good nor bad.  However, in fairness, it does give the impression that you are not considered to be a deep-rooted criminal.

11.  Mr Kwong, with his usual thoroughness entered mitigation on your behalf.  He told me that you had committed the offence after falling into the trap of accepting the promise from dubious people of being able to earn easy money.  I am told that you never in fact received any money.  On your behalf, he acknowledged that the amount of ketamine was high, falling within the guidelines of 6 to 9 years’ immediate imprisonment. 

12.  Whilst quite rightly he made reference to two cases, in my opinion, each case must and can only be viewed on its own facts. 

13.  He told me that you are remorseful, this has been demonstrated by your plea of guilty, and he produced the letter that you had written to the court.  In setting the sentence, I have taken that letter into account.

14.  He drew my attention to the presence of your parents in court who are here to lend their support.  That is a positive factor.  He concluded by urging leniency and asking me to give you a final chance.

15.  I turn now to the sentence.

16.  Drugs trafficking is a serious offence to which the courts of Hong Kong have always delivered condign sentences commensurate with the criminality involved. 

17.  In this case we have 105 grammes of ketamine, a substantial quantity of dangerous drugs, being delivered by a young man with a previous record relating to drugs.  To state the obvious, you were acting as a courier.  That is an essential role in the trafficking of drugs.  Whilst your relative youth is noted, in my opinion, this affords little mitigation as to do so would encourage the use of the young in such enterprises. 

18.  In deciding the sentence I have taken into account the facts of the case, especially the amount of drugs involved, the mitigation advanced and the contents of the Probation Officer’s Report.  I do note your age and criminal record.

19.  I accept that you have demonstrated a level of remorse by what you say in your letter and your timely plea of guilty.  I note that at the scene, whilst you were not entirely straightforward with the police, you were co-operative to a degree.  Therefore, I intend to impose a sentence which is as lenient as is consistent with my public duty. 

20.  I therefore take the very bottom of the starting point of the tariff, that being 6 years, reduced to 4 years for your plea of guilty.  You will go to prison for 4 years.