|
DCCC833/2012
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 833 OF 2012
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Liu Ka-shing |
|
| ---------------------- |
| Before: |
H H Judge Woodcock |
| Date: |
19 October 2012 at 2.59 pm |
| Present: |
Ms Mickey Fung, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr Fung Sik-yue, of Messrs S Y Fung, Solicitors, 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. Defendant has pleaded guilty today to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.
2. Particulars of the offence are that on 18 July this year at the staircase of the 3rd Floor of Tak Shing House, Tak Tin Estate, Lam Tin, the defendant did unlawfully traffic in a dangerous drug, namely 37.1 grammes of a powder containing 30.23 grammes of ketamine.
3. The facts of this case are very straightforward. On that day, 18 July, at about 8.45 pm, police officers were patrolling the staircase of that Tak Shing House. When they reached the 3rd floor, the defendant pushed open the door of the staircase and walked straight into the police officers. The defendant looked shocked and nervous, and an officer saw that he was holding a white item in his right hand. That police officer stopped and searched the defendant. Three plastic bags containing this quantity of ketamine were found in his right hand.
4. At the time of his arrest, he had $1,600 odd in his possession.
5. And the police estimate the street value of the ketamine in this charge to be about $4,266.
6. The defendant is a 20-year-old man, a young man, but this is not a case of extreme youth.
7. He has had until now a clear record. He is on police bail for an offence not similar to this but has not been charged yet.
8. The defendant lives with his mother and his father had passed away some time ago. He has received education up until Form 3 standard, and when he was arrested, he was working in a convenience store.
9. Defence counsel said the defendant does have a habit of partaking in ketamine or cocaine, but there is no such evidence before me of such a habit or an addiction.
10. I note he has no previous convictions for any drug-related offence, nor did he suffer any withdrawal symptoms after his arrest. There is no reason that I would consider only part of the dangerous drugs in this case for the purposes of trafficking.
11. There are guidelines that dictate a tariff where trafficking ketamine is concerned, and I have considered the authority of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2008] 3 HKC 323. That the relevant tariff that would be appropriate here is, according to that authority, where 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine is trafficked and this would attract a term of imprisonment of between 4 to 6 years.
12. Mathematically speaking, the 30.23 grammes of ketamine in this case would attract a 5-year starting point.
13. Defendant, please stand up.
14. I have considered your previous clear record, your plea today, your mitigation put forward on your behalf that includes your background, age and, lastly, I consider the facts of this case.
15. After considering all those above factors, I would take a starting point of 4 years and 6 months. You are entitled to a discount of 18 months for your plea today. For this offence, you are sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years’ imprisonment.
| |
A. J. Woodcock |
| |
District Judge |
|