CRIMINAL CASE NO. 30 OF 2011
COURT: The defendant has been convicted by a jury of trafficking in dangerous drugs, namely 370.81 grammes of powder containing 275.53 grammes of ketamine and 15.16 grammes of a solid containing 12.74 grammes of cocaine.
The facts as revealed during the trial were that the police officers gained entry into the Flat 18 and in one of the rooms inside the flat were dangerous drugs on a desk, together with packaging material, a lot of resealable plastic bags. Some bags were already packaged into small packets of cocaine and small packets of ketamine. Also on the same desk were two electronic scales so, obviously, packaging of these drugs was going on.
The defendant’s fingerprints were found, most importantly, on the resealable plastic bag containing ketamine. Also found on the defendant were keys to the flat and also specifically to Room A. The drugs have a retail value of about HK$54,000.
The defendant is aged 30 and has a clear record. That is the only mitigating factor as far as the defendant is concerned. However, in dangerous drugs trials, it has not been recognised as a factor that would decrease sentence.
This is a mixture of drugs that has been found; it is cocaine and ketamine. The Court of Appeal has said that in assessing sentence, the amounts should be added up and the defendant sentenced on the total weight of the drugs. So because the ketamine is more, some 275.53 grammes of ketamine, plus the 12.74 grammes of cocaine, would bring the total weight up to 288.27 grammes.
In the recent case of Hii Siew Cheng, sentencing for ketamine and Ecstasy for between 50 grammes to 300 grammes would call for a sentence of between 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment. So in this case, the appropriate sentence would be in the region of 8½ to 9 years.
I do not consider what Mr Yuen said in mitigation, that there were Admitted Facts in this case which the court should consider therefore in somehow reducing the sentence because he had saved the court’s time. In effect, a large part of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was in relation to the fact of the arrest and the circumstances in which the drugs were found and so, in effect, there was not much saving of time.
I do have to consider, though, that this will be the first time that the defendant will hear the clanging of the prison gate and taking that into account, therefore, I will sentence the defendant to 8½ years’ imprisonment.