HKSAR v. LEUNG KIT YAN, KAREN

HCCC 197/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 197 OF 2015

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: The defendant has been convicted on her own plea of one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

The Particulars of Offence provide that on 2 December 2014, at Room 2115, Sun Wo House, Tai Wo Estate, Tai Po, New Territories in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 14.46 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 14.27 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as the ‘Ice’ drug.

The “Facts for Plea” admitted by the defendant provides that on 2 December 2014, a team of police officers were on duty on the 21st Floor of Sun Wo House, Tai Wo Estate, Tai Po. PC8798 and PC7080 kept observation at the staircase outside Room 2115. The officers began observation at about 2030 hours and thereafter witnessed seven males, around 20 to 30 years old, successively walking from the lobby to Room 2115 and ringing the doorbell. Each time, the door was slightly open from the inside and something was done with the hands of the caller and the person inside.

At approximately 2200 hours, the defendant came out of Room 2115 and walked towards the staircase. PC 8798 produced his warrant card and intercepted the defendant.

At this time, the door to Room 2115 was opened and a male (So Man-chun) was seen looking out. Mr So looked agitated when he saw PC8798 and quickly retreated.

PC8798 notified his colleagues and they all came to the door of Room 2115. The defendant was escorted inside the premises, where a search was conducted. The following items were found by PC7080:

(1) a black waist bag containing a pink plastic box marked “200”, “300”, “500” and “self”;

(2) a black electronic scale;

(3) 18 transparent resealable plastic bags containing ‘Ice’;

(4) three similar bags containing ‘Ice’;

(5) three similar bags containing ‘Ice’;

(6) a large quantity of resealable plastic bags in a black plastic box;

(7) a plastic bottle adapted with tubes to consume ‘Ice’; and

(8) a plastic bottle containing liquid used to consume ‘Ice’.

When PC7080 reported the result of his search to his supervisor, Sergeant 51717, the defendant suddenly said “Mine”.

At 2245 hours, PC8798 arrested the defendant for trafficking in dangerous drugs and formally cautioned her. In reply to the caution, the defendant replied

“All the dangerous drugs that you have just talked about were bought by me, because the ‘Ice’, besides for my own consumption is sometimes to treat for (my) friends, sometimes for free but sometimes not. This is why so much ‘Ice’ kept at home.”

The defendant and the exhibits were later taken to the Tai Po Police Station. The defendant was interviewed by PC8798 and PC7080 under video between 0220 hours to 0317 hours.

In the video-recorded interview, the defendant admitted, inter alia:

(1) She cohabited in the said premises with So Man-dik for a year;

(2) She bought the subject drugs from an unnamed friend at a discount price of $2,000;

(3) She stored the subject drugs at home in labelled boxes for sharing with, or selling to, friends; and

(4) The electronic scale was used for weighing the dangerous drug.

The drugs seized are as specified in the Indictment, namely “14.46 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 14.27 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.”

In December 2014, the estimated “retail street value” of the seized drugs was $6,319.

In the “Facts for Plea”, the defendant expressly admitted that she had the seized drug in her possession, custody or control for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.”

By way of personal background, the defendant is 22 years of age. She was born in Hong Kong in January 1994. The defendant has received education up to secondary Form 6 level in Hong Kong. After leaving school, the defendant had been employed as an assembly line worker at a food factory. At the time of her arrest, she was working as a cashier at a convenience store, earning around $4,000 to $6,000 per month. The defendant is not a drug addict. The defendant had been living with her parents since birth until November 2013, when she moved to live with her boyfriend.

The defendant does not have any previous criminal conviction.

By way of mitigation, Ms Anita Ma rightly submitted on behalf of the defendant that the most important mitigating factor is her guilty plea today.

I am told that the defendant comes from a good and decent family. Her father is a retired technician who used to work at the Poly University, and her mother is a house wife.

The defendant’s trouble really started when she met her then boyfriend in 2013. She very soon fell in love with him and they started cohabiting in late 2013.

Her boyfriend was unemployed with no skills and, worse still, a drug addict. The defendant used to pay for all their daily expenses.

One day, the boyfriend suggested that the defendant should earn quick money by trafficking in dangerous drugs. He even promised her that he would take her on a trip to Paris from the profits made. Being a simple and naïve person, the defendant agreed to do as instructed by her boyfriend. I am told that the defendant herself bought the drug in question in Mong Kok, and she would distribute the drug as instructed by her boyfriend.

A letter from the defendant’s parents has been handed up to the court, the contents whereof have been duly noted.

However, having said all of that, whilst the defendant may have been made use of by her boyfriend and her circumstances being unfortunate, it has been stated by the courts on many previous occasions that the personal and family circumstances of a defendant will afford little mitigation in cases of drug trafficking, which call for severe deterrent sentences in order to protect the public.

The defendant has been convicted on one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 14.46 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 14.27 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

The offence was committed on 2 December 2014, ie, after the Court of Appeal had handed down its Judgment in the case of HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691 on 9 June 2014, which sets out revised tariffs for trafficking in the ‘Ice’ drug. In the Tam Yi Chun case, for trafficking in between 10 grammes and 70 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, the proper sentence to be imposed after trial was held to be 7 to 11 years’ imprisonment.

In my judgment, following the guidelines in the Tam Yi Chun case and bearing in mind all the circumstances of this case, the appropriate starting point for sentence in the present case should be 7 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.

I shall give the defendant a full one-third discount for her guilty plea.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 4 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.