|
DCCC5/2010
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 5 OF 2010
----------------------
----------------------
|
Before:
|
Deputy District Judge H F Woo
|
|
Date:
|
5 March 2010 at 12.32 pm
|
|
Present:
|
Miss Chan Sze-yan, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Ms Tam May, of Solomon C Chong & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
|
-------------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
-------------------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to an offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 204.45 grammes of a powder containing 132.44 grammes of ketamine. Such offence was contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.
Facts
2. The facts of this case could be summarised as follows.
3. At 9.35 pm on 16 October 2009, police officers intercepted a private car, NX6378 (“the vehicle”), at Wong Tai Sin. It was driven by the defendant, who was the registered owner. When the police officers revealed their identity and demanded the defendant to alight from the vehicle for a search, the defendant picked up a plastic bag from the gearbox, tore off the bag and threw the white powder contained therein outside the window of the driver seat. As a result, 204.45 grammes of white powder containing 132.44 grammes of ketamine were scattered on the ground and inside the front compartment of the vehicle.
4. The defendant attempted to flee but was subdued and arrested by police officers.
5. Under caution, the defendant admitted that he conveyed drugs for money. He confessed that about 8 pm on 16 October 2009 he was instructed by ‘Ah Keung’ to collect a bag of ketamine at Fung Tak Road to be delivered to an unknown person for a reward of $1,000.
Sentence Tariff
6. Tariff bands for trafficking in ketamine were set out in the Court of Appeal case in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng, CACC126/2007. The sentences range for 50 to 300 grammes would warrant 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment. As the harmful effect of ketamine to the drug abusers and the society had been elaborated in the above case, this court does not intend to go into it.
Mitigation and Reasons for Sentence
7. The defendant, aged 31, has eight previous convictions, five of which were drug-related. He was sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment in October 2004 for a trafficking in a dangerous drugs offence. In July 2009, a 12 month imprisonment suspended for 24 months’ sentence was imposed against him for possession of dangerous drugs. In less than 3 months’ time he was arrested in the present case for trafficking in a large quantity of ketamine.
8. This court cannot sense any remorse from the defendant. Imprisonment had apparently no deterrent effect on him. There was no reason for this court not to activate his suspended sentence.
9. Apart from his guilty plea, nothing much could be said on behalf of the defendant in mitigation.
Sentence
10. Having fully considered the background of the case and of the defendant, mitigation put forward by the defence solicitor, the sentence tariff and the totality principle, this court would adopt a starting point of 81 months imprisonment. Such term would be reduced one-third for his plea to 54 months’ imprisonment.
11. Bearing in mind the totality principle, this court would order 10 months of his suspended sentence be activated and to run consecutively to the 54 months’ imprisonment.
12. As such, the defendant has to serve a total term of 64 months’ imprisonment.
| |
H F Woo |
| |
Deputy District Judge |
|