HKSAR v. TIAN HEHUAN

DCCC 322/2020

[2020] HKDC 608

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 322 OF 2020

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.  The defendant pleads guilty to an offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.

2.  This case involves a total of 15.13 grammes of a solid containing 12.37 grammes of ketamine. 

3.  At around 11:59 am on 14 February 2020, PC23613 spotted the defendant near the junction of Argyle Street and Reclamation Street, Mongkok, Kowloon.  The defendant was later intercepted and upon search, the following items were found on him:-

(a) Under the waistband of the defendant’s underwear, 1 plastic bag containing 13 resealable plastic bags containing a total of 9.32 grammes of a solid containing 7.62 grammes of ketamine; and

(b) Inside the front right pocket of the defendant’s shorts, 8 resealable plastic bags containing a total of 5.81 grammes of a solid containing 4.75 grammes of ketamine.

4.  The defendant was then arrested for trafficking in a dangerous drug.  Under caution, the defendant admitted that he was bringing the drugs to clients for monetary reward.

5.  The estimated value of the dangerous drugs was HK$9,501. 

6.  The defendant admits that at all material times, he possessed all the ketamine in the present case for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

Mitigation

7.  Defence lawyer has filed a set of written submissions and some mitigation letters.  I have considered them in full. 

8.  In gist, the defendant was born in the PRC and is now 23 years old.  He completed Form 3 education in Hong Kong.  He was a construction site worker, able to earn about $15,000 per month.  He used to contribute substantial part of his earnings to support his family.  He lived with his parents and a younger brother.

9.  In mitigation, it is said that the defendant did not know about the seriousness of his act when he was told by his old schoolmate to help deliver some drugs but on the other hand he did it for monetary return. 

10.  It is submitted that the defendant is deeply remorseful.  He has great support from his family.  He has a clear criminal record as well.

11.  Defence lawyer does not rely on self-consumption as mitigation albeit that the defendant had such indication at the time when the present case was set down for Plea and Sentence.  I confirm with the defence that the defendant does not rely on such mitigation anymore.

Assessment of Sentence

12.  The applicable sentencing guideline is HKSAR v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1.  The quantity of 10 to 50 grammes fall within the range of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment.

13.  I have also considered all the mitigations put forward, in particular, the age of the defendant.

14.  First of all, I do not consider that any other form of sentence is appropriate.  I also do not consider calling any report necessary.  Trafficking in dangerous drugs is one of the most serious offences.

15.  The defendant has a clear previous record and he pleads guilty in the present case.

16.  Having carefully considered, I shall take 49 months as the starting point.

17.  The defendant is entitled to a 1/3 discount for his guilty plea.  It brings the sentence to 32.67 months.  I shall reduce it to 30 months, such credit being given merely out of discretion for his relatively young age and previous clear record with a view to encouraging his rehabilitation and reform.

18.  I do not see any further discount justified.

19.  The defendant is sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment accordingly.