COURT: Mr Lee, will you please stand? I am about to impose my sentence upon you.
The defendant has pleaded guilty to an offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug. He entered his plea in the Magistrates Court on 6 June 2014, whereupon he was committed to this court for sentence.
The particulars of offence read that the defendant, on 31 December 2013, outside Room 2411 of Lung Hong House, Lower Wong Tai Sin Estate, Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon, unlawfully trafficked in 69.94 grammes of a mixture containing 57.97 grammes of heroin. The estimated street value of the drugs at the time of the offence was $54,483.
The Summary of Facts as agreed to by the defendant, provide that the police, acting on information, intercepted the defendant at about 3.35 pm on 31 December 2013, when he was coming out of Room 2411. He was searched and found inside his front right trousers pocket were three resealable plastic bags containing a total of 300 pellets of what was later confirmed to be heroin.
He was immediately arrested and upon caution he said, “The 4 Chai is not mine. I am only bringing the three packets of 4 Chai to the other at Mongkok for some money.” The police then searched Room 2411, which was the defendant’s home and they found one electronic balance, two rolls of plastic sheets and a pile of resealable plastic bags. This was the usual paraphernalia for the purposes of trafficking in drugs.
In a video-recorded interview, the defendant stated that he was given the drugs by another person 2 day’s prior to his apprehension and he was to bring the drugs to this person for a fee of $600. He also stated that the items found by the police inside his home were for the purpose of packaging the drugs.
The defendant is 44 years of age and has an appalling criminal record. Since 1982, at the age of 13 years, he has regularly come before the courts and dealt with for numerous offences relating to violence, property and drugs. On his last court appearance in January of 2003, he was convicted of two offences of trafficking in a dangerous drug, which I am told concerned a quantity of “ice” and was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 7 years and 4 months.
It appears he was released from prison in 2007 and became addicted to heroin in 2011. He has claimed that he takes heroin six to seven times a day and as a result of his drug addiction, has been diagnosed with Hepatitis C.
I note from his criminal record, that despite his regular appearances before the courts, he has not been ordered to attend a drug and addiction treatment centre. However, given the frequency of his criminal wrongdoing and the seriousness of the crimes that he has committed, consideration now for a DATC order is out of the question.
But I do take the opportunity to recommend to the relevant authorities that he be given appropriate treatment for his drug addiction during the period of his incarceration, as a result of the prison sentence that will now be imposed upon him for this offence.
There is very little that can be advanced by way of mitigation on behalf of the defendant. All that could be said was very ably submitted to me by Mr Mughal on his behalf. He is a repeat offender who is clearly a danger, not only to himself, but also to others. Until he gets his drug addiction under control, he poses a serious threat to the community, both in terms of the crimes that he is capable of committing, as evidenced by his prior criminal record, and the harm he may cause to others through his role in the distribution and supply of drugs, more than likely in order to feed his drug addiction.
It is submitted by Mr Mughal on his behalf, that since his incarceration for this offence, he has become a Christian and has decided to turn a new leaf. Only time will tell whether he does so. He has expressed his remorse and regret for his criminal wrongdoing and the impact that this has had on his family, in particular, his mother and wife and two year old daughter.
Unfortunately his remorse and regret comes too late for them, because his wife is separated from him and lives in a public housing estate and is left to support, on her own, the upbringing of her daughter. I trust that his conviction to Christianity may make him realise the error of his ways and start to show some responsibility towards those close to him.
According to the tariff case of Lau Tak Ming, for the narcotic content involved in this offence, a starting point of 8 years and 3 months’ imprisonment should be imposed. I consider the defendant to be a recidivist and as an aggravating factor, accordingly his sentence will be slightly enhanced in the hope that he will get the message that the courts will not tolerate a continuing attitude of disobedience of the law.
I therefore fix a starting point of 9 years’ imprisonment, which I will reduce by one-third for the discount given on a plea of guilty and sentence the defendant to 6 years’ imprisonment. You may sit down.