|
HCCC 142/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO 142 OF 2017
-----------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v |
|
| |
NG Siu-kong, Julius |
|
-----------------
| Before: |
Hon Andrew Chan J |
| Date: |
18 August 2017 at 3.00 pm |
| Present: |
Miss Lo Shui-ying Sabra, SPP of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr Ma Ming-tak Stephen, instructed by WT Law Offices,
assigned by DLA, for the accused |
| Offence: |
(1) & (2) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物) |
-------------------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case
-------------------------------------------
COURT:
The defendant has pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in dangerous drugs in the Magistrates Court. He was committed to this court for sentence.
The Summary of Facts reveals the following. On the material day, the defendant was intercepted outside one hotel room by police officers in Mong Kok. Upon a search of one bag that the defendant was carrying, police officers found 62.8 grammes of ketamine. Inside the hotel room, the police officers found another 761.2 grammes of ketamine and two electronic scales.
The retail value of the ketamine, totalling 824 grammes, was found to be in the range of HK$1.12 million.
The defendant is 19 and has received education up to Form 3 level. He has one previous trafficking in a dangerous drug record and was sentenced in 2013 to Training Centre. It seems his experience in the Training Centre has not produced the necessary deterrence effect. Upon discharge from the Training Centre, not long, the defendant relapsed into trafficking dangerous drugs.
In this case, apart from the defendant’s plea, I do not see any mitigation factors.
Guidelines on sentencing are clear. The sentence for trafficking in 50 to 300 grammes of ketamine is one of 6 to 9 years’ immediate imprisonment. The sentence for trafficking in 600 to 1,000 grammes is one of 12 to 14 years’ imprisonment.
For the 1st count, the appropriate starting point should therefore be set at 6 years’ imprisonment. Given the defendant’s plea, he is therefore sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
For the 2nd count, the appropriate starting point should be set at 12 years and 6 months, 12½ years. Similarly, given the defendant’s plea, he is sentenced to 8 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
Having considered the totality principle and the total quantity of the drugs, it is therefore ordered that 4 months of Count 1 to be served consecutively to the 8 years and 4 months on Count 2.
So in conclusion, for the two counts to which the defendant has pleaded guilty, he is sentenced to 8 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
|