|
DCCC239/2010
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONGSPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 239 OF 2010
----------------------
----------------------
|
Date:
|
13 April 2010 at 2.43 pm
|
|
Present:
|
Ms Chan Wan-ting, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Yeung Sai-yuen, of Messrs Foo, Leung & Yeung, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
(1) & (2) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
|
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant pleaded guilty to two offences of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The first offence was committed on 8 April 2009 when he trafficked in 5.45 grammes of ketamine. The second offence was committed whilst the defendant was on bail for the first offence on 21 December 2009. He was found trafficking in 10.33 grammes of ketamine.
2. The facts in relation to the first offence are that at 4.15 on the afternoon of 8 April, an officer found 10 packets of suspected dangerous drugs in an electric circuit box at the lift lobby of the 20th floor of On Hong House in Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon. Officers set an ambush and about half an hour later, they saw the defendant appear in the lift lobby. He approached the electric box and stretched his hand. He withdrew the drugs from within. He put the drugs into his trouser pocket.
3. He was intercepted. The drugs were found in his possession. He said, “Ah sir, these K Chai are mine, are for my own consumption. Some of them will be sold to others.” The defendant’s house was searched, and at those premises the officers recovered 51 empty transparent plastic bags and 2 electronic scales.
4. The defendant under caution said he obtained 14 grammes of ketamine from a person called Ah Sing for $800 on 5 April. He repacked that into 20 smaller packets and sold 10 of those to his ex‑school friends between 5 and 7 April. He received $100 for each of the packets. And what was left over, he placed in the electric circuit box.
5. The defendant was granted bail. At 7.23 on 21 December, he was seen acting furtively outside the ground floor of Fuk Wa Street, Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, and the drugs, the subject of the 2nd charge, were found inside his left front pocket of his trousers. Under caution, he admitted that he was delivering the drugs for someone from Garden Company to the Golden Arcade in Sham Shui Po in return for a reward of $180.
6. The defendant does not have the advantage of a clear record. He has previous convictions for two drug-related offences. In 2006, he was sentenced to rehabilitation centre. In 2008, he was allowed probation in respect of a charge of possession of dangerous drugs, but he breached that probation and was later ordered to go to a drug addiction treatment centre.
7. In mitigation, I was told that the defendant is 20 years of age. He was educated to Form 3 standard and he is the youngest of a family of five. He lives with his parents and two elder sisters. As regards the first offence, he maintains that some of the drugs were for his own consumption, and I will take that into account when considering the starting point for sentence.
8. I am told that previously, the defendant worked as a kitchen apprentice for a restaurant but because of having to answer his bail conditions, he asked for leave from his job and eventually he was dismissed from his employment. His spirits became low and it was in those circumstances that he started to take drugs and was lured by his peers to deliver drugs as a reward for receiving some for free.
9. The defendant has been kept in custody since his arrest on the 2nd charge. I am told that he has had time to reflect on his position and now he is determined to stay away from his old friends and he intends to work hard.
10. Now, notwithstanding his previous court appearances, in these court appearances, his family has stood by him. His mother is at court today and has placed before the court a letter of support, saying that she is sure the defendant is determined to reform. In order to assist that process, I understand that she has moved away from the premises that they have formerly occupied. She asked for a chance and asked for forgiveness.
11. The defendant, has two previous convictions and must realise that offences of trafficking in ketamine are serious offences. He says that in relation to the 1st charge, some of the ketamine was for his own use but he admits having sold packets previously to his ex-schoolmates from the consignment he received and, also, found at his premises there were 51 empty transparent plastic bags recovered and 2 electronic scales. The defendant was well-equipped with the paraphernalia of a trafficker. Having been released on bail, the defendant re‑offended, and on this occasion, the amount of ketamine found in his possession was 10.33 grammes.
12. Looking at all the circumstances in relation to Charge 1, I have decided that an appropriate starting point would be 3 years’ imprisonment and he is entitled to a discount for his guilty plea. So that will be reduced to 24 months’ imprisonment.
13. On the 2nd charge, the appropriate starting point would be 4 years’ imprisonment. Again, he is entitled to a discount for his guilty plea. So that will be reduced to 32 months’ imprisonment.
14. I now have to consider the question of totality. The Court of Appeal have said that where persons commit offences whilst on bail, sentences for such offences should be entirely consecutive. I have considered what the effect of a totally consecutive sentence would be. I have decided to make only part of that sentence for the second offence consecutive. I order that 16 months of the sentence on Charge 2 should run consecutive to the 24 months on Charge 1.
15. The defendant will therefore go to prison for a total period of 40 months.
|