HKSAR v. YIP MAN HEI

HCCC 65/2018

[2018] HKCFI 1876

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 65 OF 2018

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:

The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a dangerous drug, namely, 8.89 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 8.70 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and the 2nd count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely, 5,341 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 5,191 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

The defendant on the afternoon of 10 December 2016 was inside a private car which had stopped outside Wah Lok House, Wah Fu Estate. He was the driver of the car. When police officers approached the car intending to conduct an inquiry, they revealed their police identities, the defendant reversed his car intending to escape, but the car was blocked by other vehicles behind so he could not escape.

Found in the jacket the defendant was wearing was a packet of ‘Ice’ which is the subject matter of the 1st count. Found in the boot of the car was a carton containing 26 cans of purported sweet corn and when one of the cans were opened, a resealable plastic bag was inside and subsequently found to contain ‘Ice’.

The defendant was arrested and cautioned and the defendant admitted that the carton belonged to him and he had bought the carton for $80,000. Subsequently, when the other 25 cans were opened, each of those cans contained a plastic bag of ‘Ice’. So, in total, 26 plastic bags of ‘Ice’ were found containing the drugs which is the subject matter of Count 2.

The estimated retail value of those drugs seized in this case at that time is about $1,783,863.

The defendant was subsequently interviewed, and in his video-recorded interview, he said that the packet found in his jacket was for his own consumption. He said that he had bought the drugs in the 26 cans from a friend whose identity he did not wish to disclose and he was waiting for calls from customers to sell those drugs to.

The defendant is a young man of 29 years. Unfortunately, he has a very, very poor record. He has some 27 previous convictions, 11 dangerous drugs related and three of those 11 were for trafficking.

In mitigation, Mr Wong has said everything he can say under the circumstances. The main mitigating factor is that the defendant had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is, therefore, entitled to one-third discount and I also agree with him that since the drugs in both counts were found so close to each other, it should be a concurrent sentence.

The drugs being of the same nature and found around the same time, if one added up the quantities of both drugs, would give us a total of about 5,199.70 whole grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. As the Court of Appeal has said, the sentencing should follow Abdallah [2009] 2 HKC 196, for quantities over 600 grammes.

It is suggested that for trafficking in 4,000 to 15,000 grammes of drug would merit a starting point sentence of 26 to 30 years. The quantity here, the total quantity here, as Mr Wong correctly pointed out, would be a starting point of about 26 years and I agree, as I have said, with Mr Wong, that those sentences should be concurrent, so, I sentence the defendant in the following way.

For the 1st count, I would adopt a starting point of 12 months, which, with the plea, would reduce it to 8 months.

For the 2nd count, I would adopt a 26-year starting point and giving the defendant the full one-third discount would reduce the sentence to 17 years and 4 months, and both sentences to be served concurrently.