HKSAR v. LAU KWOK SHING

HCCC 88/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 88 OF 2014

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

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

COURT: The defendant has been convicted on his own plea on one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

The Particulars of Offence provide that the defendant, on 3 October 2013, at the staircase, 36th Floor, Yat Wan House, Tin Yat Estate, Tin Shui Wai, New Territories, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 195.85 grammes of a powder containing 156.75 grammes of ketamine.

The Summary of Facts admitted by the defendant provides that on 3 October 2013, police officers were patrolling along the rear staircase at the said Yat Wan House, when they saw the defendant entering the staircase from the lift lobby on the 36th floor. The defendant then went up to the staircase landing between the 36th floor and the 37th floor but suddenly turned round with a view to go back down to the 36th floor.

The defendant was intercepted by the police officers. Upon search, a plastic bag containing 195.85 grammes of a powder containing 156.75 grammes of ketamine was found hidden inside the defendant’s underpants. The defendant also had with him HK$1,400 in cash. The defendant was arrested.

In an interview by a police officer in the afternoon of 4 October 2013, the defendant admitted, (1) that he lived on the 33rd floor of the building where he was arrested; (2) that he intended to go to the 37th floor to unload the ketamine in question; and (3) that he earned HK$5,000 to HK$6,000 per month as a kitchen worker.

The street value of the ketamine in question as in October 2013 was about HK$24,285. The defendant admitted that he unlawfully trafficked in the ketamine in question.

By way of personal background, the defendant is 22 years of age, born in China. He was educated in Hong Kong up to secondary 3 level. Prior to his arrest, he worked as an assistant chef, earning about $8,000 a month. He is single and he resided with his mother and elder sister before his arrest.

The defendant has two previous convictions for theft and four records of breach of Probation Order, all committed in 2008.

By way of mitigation, Mr Andrew Kan, on behalf of the defendant, urged upon the court to take into account his guilty plea. Mr Kan realistically accepted that the only mitigation in the present case is the defendant’s guilty plea.

The defendant has been convicted on his own plea of one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The drug involved is 195.85 grammes of a powder containing 156.75 grammes of ketamine. The Court of Appeal, in the case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, has set out the tariffs for trafficking in ketamine. For trafficking in between 50 to 300 grammes of ketamine, the proper sentence to be imposed after trial should be 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment.

In my view, following the guideline in the Hii Siew Cheng case and based on the quantity of the narcotic involved, the proper starting point for sentence in the present case should be 7 years and 3 months’ imprisonment. I shall give the defendant a full one-third discount for his guilty plea.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 4 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.