HKSAR v. CHEUNG TAI FUNG

HCCC 156/2019

[2019] HKCFI 2193

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 156 OF 2019

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

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

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

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

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

COURT:

The defendant, who is aged 24, is a typical example of a cocaine addict who, for that reason, drifted away from his family, became unemployed and in debt and then, no doubt in order to obtain money for his drugs, succumbed to the temptation of the easy rewards offered for trafficking in drugs on behalf of others. In this case, the defendant appears to have been offered $4,000 for each delivery he made.

In this particular case, on 7 November 2018, shortly after 8 o’clock in the evening, the defendant was stopped in Heng Fa Chuen and his backpack was searched. Police discovered six resealable plastic bags which contained a total of 73.5 grammes of a crystalline solid of which the narcotic content revealed 72.4 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as ‘Ice’. That is the subject of Charge 1.

He was also at that time in possession of $12,460, a mobile phone and keys. The keys fitted the lock for the room the defendant was seen leaving when he was first seen and the renting of that room was in his name. Here the police found an electronic scale, 100 unused resealable plastic bags and a further crystalline solid containing 21.3 grammes of ‘Ice’. The total value of the drugs in this case has been estimated at $57,500.

The defendant said that the quantity the police had seized was for his own consumption, but this was revealed to be a lie because, apart from anything else, when he was tested later after his arrest, there was a negative result for amphetamine. The antecedent statement reveals that the defendant had admitted that he was a regular user of cocaine.

Now, as part of the mitigation advanced on behalf of the defendant, I have read a letter from the defendant which undoubtedly appears, as his parents observed, to be a very remorseful attitude on his part. Whether he will be able to maintain his hopes when he is once again free in society, only the defendant will be able to know. The signs are hopeful but he will have to prove himself capable of steering clear of drugs. His parents are clearly in despair as they have been let down time and again.

The defendant is well aware of the destructive effects of drugs but he was still prepared to distribute drugs to others, the effect of which could only cause misery to other families. This is why trafficking is such a serious offence. Useful members of society become a drain on society and drug users often have to turn to crime to find the money to pay for the drugs they are addicted to.

The defendant, I am told, has been fully advised about the sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ‘Ice’. These are to be found in HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691 and here we are concerned with a total quantity of 97.3 grammes. This falls within a sentencing band of between 11 and 15 years’ imprisonment which can be imposed after a contested trial for 70 to 300 grammes. I propose, therefore, to take a starting point of 11 years and 4 months as the overall starting point applicable to this case, and that is the sentence the defendant would have received if he had not pleaded guilty in the Magistrates’ Court.

As there are two charges, there will need to be an appropriate sentence on each. Now, Mr Cheung, would you stand, please? You have pleaded guilty at the earliest stage and I may say that you have counsel on your behalf who said everything that can be said and for that you should be grateful. I only hope that the promise you have made to yourself to lead a useful life when you come out is a promise that you can fulfil. Failure to live up to your hopes would only let down your parents who have done so much for you. And worse than that, probably see you spending most of your youth in prison which is a complete waste of your life. The one good thing that prison must be able to do in your case is get you off your addiction.

Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty, the sentence on Charge 1 is that you will go to prison for 7 years and 4 months. On Charge 2, the sentence is that you will go to prison for 5 years, of which just 2 months will run consecutively. The remainder of that sentence is to run concurrently and so what it comes to is this: your sentence, in overall terms, is 7½ years, 7 years 6 months.