HKSAR v. CHIU CHI YEUNG

HCCC 156/2024

[2025] HKCFI 3686

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 156 OF 2024

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug on 9 May 2024 and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Today he confirms his plea and the admission of the Summary of Facts.

The particulars of the offence are that the defendant on 6 February 2023 outside Pik Long House, Shek Pai Wan Estate, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely, 47.6 grammes of a solid containing 44.8 grammes of cocaine.

The facts are that the defendant was arrested on the material day at about 10 pm. He was sat in the back of a taxi. Police officers on anti-narcotics operation, spotted the defendant in a taxi at a bus stop outside this estate. The taxi was put under observation. The defendant did not get out of the taxi, and after about one minute, the taxi drove away. The taxi came back 20 minutes later, with the defendant still sat in the back seat. This made the police suspicious, so they approached the taxi and questioned the defendant.

He was searched, and the cocaine of this charge was found in his trouser pocket in three resealable plastic bags. The defendant also had a significant amount of cash on him, and two mobile phones. He was arrested and under caution, he told the arresting officer that he was in need of money and was being paid to distribute and deliver drugs. His home was searched with nothing suspicious found.

In a subsequent video-recorded interview, he elaborated and told the police under caution that he owed money and could not support his own daughter. He restored to delivering drugs and would be paid $500 for every 24 grammes of cocaine he delivered.

For this job and the drugs found on him, he was offered quick money to deliver this amount of cocaine. He admits knowingly possessing all the drugs for the purposes of unlawful trafficking and agrees the estimated street value of the cocaine was $37,556 in powder form or $48,933 if converted to crack cocaine.

Mitigation

The defendant is now 26 years old, was working as a part‑time construction worker when arrested. He did have a clear criminal record until this arrest and conviction. He is single but has a girlfriend and young daughter living in Shenzhen who rely on him financially. He was in financial difficulty repaying a debt and looking after their daily needs which is why he committed this offence.

I have seen and read two letters from the defendant and his parents. I accept his remorse is genuine. Ms Chan has said all she can say on behalf of the defendant in mitigation. His best mitigation is his plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity.

Sentencing

I have considered the approach to sentencing those that traffic in dangerous drugs. With the Court of Appeal’s guidance in the most recent authority, HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150, I now consider the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290.

Those six steps include: assessing the gravity of the offence and applicable guideline; identifying the defendant’s role; where within the guideline the defendant should lie; any aggravating factors; any mitigating factors; and lastly, passing a sentence which is fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.

The first step is to assess the gravity of the offence and identify the applicable guideline according to the drug seized. Taking into account the latest guidelines in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234, the starting point for trafficking in cocaine between 10 and 50 grammes is 5 to 8 years’ imprisonment. Mathematically speaking, trafficking in 44.8 grammes of cocaine attracts a starting point of 7 years and 7 months’ imprisonment.

I am satisfied that the role of the defendant in this case was that of a courier. This is a position at the bottom of the hierarchy of drug traffickers. I find the mathematical starting point should apply here.

The fourth and fifth steps require me to consider whether there are any aggravating factors or any exceptional mitigating factors. I see no such factors in this case.

The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is entitled to a full one-third discount. I will take a starting point of 7 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. After that discount is applied to that starting point, the defendant is sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment.

With the last step in mind, I consider this sentence to be fair, just, and balanced in light of the sentencing authorities, circumstances of the offence, as well as the defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment.