THE QUEEN v. LAM YICK MING

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1986, No. 537
(Criminal)

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

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

JUDGMENT

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

Cons, V.-P. delivered the judgment of the Court:

1. The Applicant was convicted of two counts of possession of dangerous drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. The first related to drugs found in a flat in his presence; the second to drugs found in a flat which had been rented on his behalf and which he had loaned to a friend, who had been using it for the purpose of a heroin factory. The drugs, the subject of the second count, were in a locked room of which the only key found by the police was in the possession of the Applicant.

2. After some days of trial he pleaded guilty to the two counts and the judge below gave no allowance for that plea. He passed a sentence of ten years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. If the Chan Chi Ming[1] guidelines were applied, adding the amounts of the two counts together, the sentence should have been in the range of between five to eight years.

3. The learned judge below gave no reason for deciding upon ten years. It is difficult in the circumstances to avoid the suspicion that he was, perhaps unconsciously, influenced by the connection with the heroin factory. But we have to remind ourselves that the Applicant was not charged with manufacturing drugs and should not be so punished.

4. However the context in which the drugs were found is a matter which has to be taken into account. In the present instance we think that context is apt to bring this offence into the very top level of the Chan Chi Ming guidelines. We therefore allow the application, treat the hearing as the appeal itself, allow the appeal and substitute a sentence of eight years' imprisonment.