HKSAR v. FAN BING HUNG

CACC 91/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2001

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCC NO. 250 OF 2000)

____________________________________

_______________________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Stock JA (giving the judgment of the Court):

On 7 June 2000 the police intercepted this applicant in a building in Mongkok and took him up to a room to which he had keys. Inside the room were found four blocks of heroin and the applicant admitted that they belonged to him. He later said to them that whilst he knew they were dangerous drugs he did not know what kind they were, and he gave no information to the police about where he had obtained them. He said that at times he used the room in which the drugs were found to sleep. The drugs were worth over $1,399,000.

2 The applicant was indicted upon one count which alleged that he had unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely $2,772 grammes of a mixture containing $1,689 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.

3 He pleaded guilty in the High Court before Deputy Judge Toh. By way of mitigation a catalogue of suggested misfortunes were advanced, but none of this was any more or less unusual than the stories frequently advanced in these cases.

4 The applicant is aged 41 years, and has one previous conviction, a conviction for robbery in 1980. The judge ignored this for the purpose of sentence, and treated him as a first offender. She took a starting point of 25 years' imprisonment, and reduced it by one third because of the plea to a term of 16 years and eight months.

5 The applicant's complaint is that this sentence is heavier than others he has come across for the same or even larger amounts and he has, in addition, put forward certain family circumstances in support of this application. As far as concern the family circumstances they are unfortunate but, again, not unusual in cases of this kind.

6 As far as the other cases are concerned, it is not of great assistance to go to other cases, for each case has its own facts, and sentencing courts have a discretion within an accepted framework. The starting point adopted in this case, of 25 years, was, we accept, at the top end for this quantity of heroin, but it is not one which this court can say is manifestly excessive. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.