A A
B B
DCCC 1271/2010
C IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1271 OF 2010 D
____________
E HKSAR E
v
F F
DONG THI LIEN
G ____________ G
H
Before: Deputy District Judge Dufton H
Date: 24 December 2010
I Present: Miss Chan Sze-yan, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR I
Miss Kelly Ho of Messrs C.K. Mok & Co assigned by the
J Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant J
Offences: (1) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
K (2) Remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the K
Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully in
L Hong Kong L
(在香港非法入境後未得入境事務處處長授權而留在香港)
M M
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
N N
1. The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in 21.52
O grammes of cocaine, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs O
Ordinance, Chapter 134 (charge 1) and one charge of remaining in Hong
P P
Kong without authority having landed unlawfully, contrary to section
Q 38(1)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance, Chapter 115. Q
R R
2. In summary on the 19th August this year the police intercepted
S the defendant in Tai Kok Tsui. When the police inquired of the S
defendant’s identity she admitted entering Hong Kong illegally from
T T
Vietnam. Upon search the police found the cocaine in the defendant’s
U U
V V
2
A A
B B
front right trouser pocket. The defendant said the drugs were given to her
C by an unknown female. C
D 3. In a subsequent interview the defendant admitted illegally D
entering Hong Kong via China in August 2009 and had since then lived
E E
on the street collecting carton boxes and scrap metal to support her living.
F Earlier on the day of arrest an unknown female had offered her a job to F
collect the cocaine from another unknown female who would pass by in a
G G
car. The defendant would then keep the cocaine until someone contacted
H her to retrieve the cocaine and reward the defendant. H
I 4. In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said I
on behalf of the defendant by Miss Ho, including that she has a young
J J
son in Vietnam, who is looked after by her elderly mother because her
K K
husband has suffered a stroke. I take into account the defendant has a
L
clear record. L
M M
Trafficking in cocaine
N N
5. The courts have equated for sentencing purposes cocaine with
O O
heroin (see Attorney General v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] 2 HKCLR 69).
P In R v LAU Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 the Court of Appeal laid P
down guidelines for trafficking in heroin. The court said that the
Q Q
sentence upon conviction after trial where the quantity of narcotic is
R between 10 and 50 grammes is between 5 and 8 years imprisonment. R
S S
6. I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial for 21.52
T grammes of cocaine is 5 years and 9 months imprisonment. I have my T
reservations that the defendant was asked by a stranger to keep safe
U U
V V
3
A A
B B
custody of over $20,000 worth of cocaine and therefore has not been
C frank with regard to her role. I am satisfied however, whatever the role of C
the defendant, this makes no difference to sentence. Giving the defendant
D D
full credit for her plea of guilty she is sentenced to 3 years and 10 months
E
imprisonment on charge 1. E
F F
Illegally remaining in Hong Kong
G G
7. In R v. SO Man-king [1989] 1 HKLR 142 the Court of Appeal
H H
held that allowing for a plea of guilty a sentence of 15 months
I imprisonment should be used as the basic guideline unless there are I
strong humanitarian considerations to depart there from. Whilst I
J J
sympathise with the defendant as to her family circumstances, in
K particular with a young child, the defendant was nevertheless prepared to K
come to Hong Kong and stay for a year leaving her child behind. I am
L L
satisfied there are no strong humanitarian grounds to reduce the sentence.
M The defendant is sentenced to 15 months imprisonment on charge 2. M
N 8. Unlawfully remaining is separate and distinct from the trafficking N
charge. Accordingly I order the sentences to be served consecutively
O O
(see HKSAR v TONG Fuk-sing [1999] 3 HKLRD 710). I am satisfied a
P total sentence of 5 years and 1 month imprisonment properly reflects the P
defendant’s criminal culpability on these two charges and gives the
Q Q
defendant a meaningful discount form the courts maximum sentencing
R R
jurisdiction of 7 years imprisonment.
S S
T (D. J. DUFTON) T
Deputy District Judge
U U
V V