COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to Section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134, before a magistrate on 2 May this year. It is alleged that on 26 April 2022, in Mong Kok, he unlawfully trafficked in 53.5 grammes of cocaine narcotic.
According to the amended Summary of Facts to which he agreed, on 26 April 2022 at about 1.18 am, the police intercepted a private car on Dundas Street, Mong Kok. The defendant was a passenger sitting in the front passenger seat. Upon search, the police found and seized, from the defendant’s trousers pocket and a sling bag which he carried, a total of two plastic bags containing 24.3 grammes of a solid containing 19.4 grammes of cocaine. They also found two mobile phones and cash in the sum of $94,338.1 on the defendant.
Upon search of the vehicle, at the vehicle door compartment next to the passenger seat where D was sitting, the police found a white plastic bag containing two plastic bags containing a total of 47.2 grammes of a solid containing 34.1 grammes of cocaine.
So the total quantity of cocaine seized from his person and from the car was 71.5 grammes of a solid containing 53.5 grammes of cocaine.
Upon his arrest, the defendant stated under caution that the owned the drugs, and he admitted ownership and self-consumption of the cocaine seized from him and in the car. He said the drug had nothing to do with the driver, and that he claimed to be unemployed.
The estimated street value of the cocaine seized was HK$64,994 for cocaine powder or HK$118,404 for crack cocaine.
The defendant now admits that he was in possession of the cocaine seized on him and in the car for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.
The defendant is 31 years of age with a total of two criminal convictions. In August 2015 he was convicted of the offences of assaulting a police officer and resisting a police officer. For those offences, he was given a probation order of 12 months.
In mitigation, counsel Mr Michael Cheung informed this court that the defendant had received education up to Form 5. He used to work as a casual public transportation worker, earning a daily wage of $800 to $1,000 per month. Counsel said his father died at the time when he was 9 years old. He lived together with his mother and grandparents, and he also had an elder sister who is married.
Counsel submitted that he committed the offence out of financial difficulties and out of foolishness. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, he stopped work at the time, and he had to borrow money from the loan sharks and financial institutions. As a result he was in debt of about HK$70,000 to HK$300,000. Then he was asked by some bad friends to deliver drugs to earn quick money.
Counsel also submitted a total of six mitigation letters written respectively by the defendant, his family members and a church friend, Madam Ho. Of course, I cannot see from the letter which church she belonged to or her full name. But, in any event, the letters from the defendant and his family indicated that he had all along been a good boy with his family, and the family also blamed themselves for not guiding him properly in the past. Counsel also informed this court that his 83-year-old grandmother is now suffering from lung cancer.
However, as counsel rightly admitted, the only mitigating factor is his early plea of guilty which will entitle him to a full one-third discount. Personal circumstances, financial difficulties and family background, they are not factors that this court will take into account in reducing any sentence.
In sentencing the defendant, I bear in mind the approach stated by the Court of Appeal in the case of Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290. This case involves a total of 53.5 grammes of cocaine narcotic. The tariff for trafficking in heroin is applicable to cocaine. According to the guideline cases, trafficking in 50 to 200 grammes of cocaine narcotic will result in a starting point after trial of 8 to 12 years’ imprisonment.
This case involves a total of 53.5 grammes of cocaine narcotic. On a mathematical calculation, the appropriate starting point should be one of 8 years and 1 month’s imprisonment, that is 97 months.
I accept counsel’s submission that at the material time he was only acting as a courier, and people acting as courier are considered to be at the bottom of the trafficking hierarchy. As a result, I consider that a notional starting point of 8 years’ imprisonment is appropriate regarding his role and culpability in this case.
There are no other aggravating factors. I agree with counsel that I should ignore the two previous convictions for the offences of assaulting and resisting police officers which happened when he was 22 years old. But, as I have said earlier, the only mitigation is his early plea of guilty which entitles him to a one-third discount.
So, after the discount, the defendant is sentenced to a total of 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment, and that is the sentence I impose.