高等法院（刑事）The Honourable Mr. Justice D. Yau23/3/2025[2025] HKCFI 1350
HCCC130/2023
A A
HCCC 130/2023
B [2025] HKCFI 1350 B
C IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
E CRIMINAL CASE NO 130 OF 2023 E
______________
F F
G HKSAR G
H v H
I CHAN WAI KIN (陳煒堅) Defendant I
______________
J J
K Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice D. Yau K
Date of Hearing: 24 March 2025
L L
Date of Sentence: 24 March 2025
M Date of Reasons for Sentence: 24 March 2025 M
N _________________________________ N
O REASONS FOR SENTENCE O
_________________________________
P P
1. The defendant pleaded guilty to 2 counts of trafficking in a
Q Q
dangerous drug before Magistrate Mr. Lam Tsz Kan, admitted to the summary of
R facts and was, on 15 May 2023, committed to the Court of First Instance for R
sentence.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 2 -
A A
PARTICULARS
B B
COUNT 1
C C
D 2. The defendant on 22 June 2021, at the staircase landing between D
ground floor and 1st floor, Hung Fat Building, Nos.94-100 Kwong Fuk Road,
E E
Tai Po, New Territories, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely
F 1,998 grammes of a solid containing 1,731 grammes of cocaine. F
G G
COUNT 2
H H
3. The defendant on 22 June 2021, at Room 2, Flat B, 4th floor, of the
I same building, unlawfully trafficked in 3,001.74 grammes of a solid containing I
2,623.75 grammes of cocaine and 290 grammes of cannabis in herbal form.
J J
K
SUMMARY OF FACTS K
L 4. The defendant was intercepted coming out of Hung Fat Building at L
around 6:58pm on 22 June 2021, holding a red plastic bag, from which was found
M M
2 blocks of solid containing the cocaine in count 1.
N N
5. Upon arrest and caution, he claimed that he was delivering the drugs
O O
for someone at $1,000 per delivery. He told the Police that the drugs were taken
P
from Room 2, Flat B on the 4th floor of Hung Fat Building. P
Q 6. Using the keys found on the defendant, the Police entered Room 2, Q
a small sub-divided flat, and found the dangerous drugs in count 2 there.
R R
S
7. More specifically, from a nylon bag on the floor, 3 packets S
containing a total of 2,997 grammes of a solid containing 2,620 grammes of
T T
cocaine were found.
U U
V V
- 3 -
A A
8. From a bag on some shelves, a bag containing 290 grammes of
B B
herbal cannabis and cash of $30,600 were found.
C C
9. On the table inside the room was a plastic box with 13 small plastic
D bags inside, containing a total of 4.74 grammes of a solid containing D
3.75 grammes of cocaine. Two electronic scales, with traces of cocaine and
E E
0.01 gramme of cocaine respectively; a pile of resealable plastic bags and the
F F
tenancy agreement of Room 2 were also on the table.
G G
10. The defendant was cautioned at scene, and he said he helped others
H to deliver the drugs found in Room 2. H
I I
11. In the subsequent video recorded interview, the defendant told the
J
Police that he began working for a man who approached him on the internet J
inviting him to earn quick money by delivering drugs in January 2021. The
K K
defendant was instructed to pick up a mobile phone at a park in Tai Po for
L
communication, and to buy some electronic scales and re-sealable plastic bags. L
The defendant rented Room 2 at $4,500 per month with him as the only occupant.
M M
12. The man would instruct the defendant to pick up packs of 12 or 24
N N
grammes of cocaine at the park, which were then re-packaged into smaller
O packets of 0.18 grammes by the defendant and delivered to buyers as instructed. O
P P
13. Each small packet would be sold at $300 and the defendant would
Q
receive $50 for each delivered. The defendant would leave the drugs proceeds at Q
the park for someone else to pick up.
R R
14. In June 2021, the man told the defendant to pick up a nylon bag at
S S
the park, which the defendant did. The defendant was later told to deliver 2 of
T T
U U
V V
- 4 -
A A
the cocaine blocks inside the bag to a park and to leave them in a flower bed. He
B B
was promised $1,000 for each delivery of the cocaine blocks.
C C
15. The defendant was intercepted by the Police while making the
D delivery of the 2 cocaine blocks inside the red plastic bag that he was carrying. D
The $30,600 cash seized from the defendant upon his arrest was drug proceeds.
E E
F 16. Investigation revealed that the defendant rented Room 2 in his own F
name, with the lease running from August 2020 for 2 years, and photos and videos
G G
of the cocaine were found in a mobile phone seized from the defendant.
H H
17. At the time of the arrest, the street value of cocaine powder is
I I
estimated to be HK$5,879,706 (at $1,176 per gramme); of crack cocaine is
J
HK$7,569,622 (at $1,514 per gramme); and the herbal cannabis is at $50,750 J
(at $175 per gramme).
K K
18. By way of his admission to the summary of facts, the defendant
L L
confirmed that he was in possession of all the dangerous drugs particularized in
M counts 1 and 2 for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. M
N N
PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS
O O
19. The defendant is of previously clear record.
P P
BACKGROUND AND MITIGATION
Q Q
20. The defendant was born in mainland China in March 1995 and is
R R
now 29 years old. He came to Hong Kong with his father when he was 5. His
S father passed away 4 years later. S
T T
U U
V V
- 5 -
A A
21. The defendant received education up to Form 3 level. After idling
B B
for some time he started working when he was 18, earning around $16,000 per
C month as a reinforcement fixing worker and renovation worker. He worked as a C
security guard later on, making $19,000 per month. The defendant contributed
D D
$2,000 a month to his mother who is a part-time worker.
E E
22. The defendant lost his job during the pandemic. He had little savings
F F
and was not able to make ends meet. Meanwhile, his relationship with his mother
deteriorated and the defendant decided to move out, renting Room 2 since
G G
August 2020.
H H
23. Moving out increased his financial burden and he resorted to
I I
borrowing from friends and later from banks and finance companies.
J J
24. At around the same time, the defendant came to know a person
K K
named Chiu Ka Keung, who suggested for the defendant to deal with dangerous
L
drugs to make some quick money. The defendant refused. L
M 25. However, as the defendant’s financial situation worsened, and with M
Chiu’s persistent persuasion, he eventually succumbed to the repayment pressure
N N
from his creditors and agreed to help Chiu deal in dangerous drugs.
O O
26. Chiu then introduced the defendant to a man named Lee Chi Kong.
P P
Lee and Chiu told the defendant to buy 2 mobile phones.
Q Q
27. Around 10 June 2021, they instructed the defendant to pick up the
R dangerous drugs from somewhere outside and to bring them back to his room. R
10 days later, they told the defendant to bring some of the dangerous drugs to a
S S
designated place. That was when the defendant was intercepted and arrested by
T the Police in this case. T
U U
V V
- 6 -
A A
28. Mr. Chau for the defendant pointed out that the defendant had a clear
B B
record, that he had confessed as well as pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
C The defendant is willing to assist the Police, but as at the time of sentencing, C
nothing had materialized yet.
D D
SENTENCE
E E
F 29. The maximum sentence on conviction upon indictment for the F
offence is that of life imprisonment and a fine of $5 million.
G G
30. First of all, although the drugs were found from two locations, which
H H
led to the prosecution laying two charges, given the proximity in time and locale
I I
of the two offences, I find that the defendant should be sentenced on the total
J
quantity of drugs found. J
K 31. Secondly, for 290g of herbal cannabis, the sentence would be in the K
range of 3 months’ imprisonment after trial1, whereas the sentence for trafficking
L L
in the cocaine for the two counts will be more than 23 years after trial. I find that
M the lengthy sentence for trafficking in the cocaine is sufficient punishment in the M
circumstances, and I exercise my discretion to disregard the cannabis when
N N
deciding on the notional starting point.
O O
32. Having said that, the fact that the defendant was trafficking in more
P P
than one type of dangerous drugs in count 2 is still a recognized aggravating
Q
factor2, and the sentence will be enhanced on this basis, which will be dealt with Q
below.
R R
S S
T
1
For 290g of herbal cannabis, the applicable guideline tariff band is that of “Under 2,000 grammes - up to 16 T
months”: See the revised guidelines in HKSAR v Nguyen Thang Loi [2023] 1 HKLRD 1329
2
HKSAR v Yim Hung-lui, Ricky, CACC 266/2011
U U
V V
- 7 -
A A
APPLYING HERRY JANE YUSUPH
B B
33. The guidelines and 6-step approach set out by the Court of Appeal
C C
in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph3, as read in conjunction with HKSAR v Lee Ming
D Ho4 are applied as follows. D
E E
Step 1: The applicable guideline tariff bands
F F
34. The parties agreed to the application of the latest sentencing
G G
guidelines as updated in the case of HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234
for cocaine.
H H
I 35. For the 1,731g of cocaine in count 1, the updated applicable I
guideline tariff band is that of “20 to 24 years’ imprisonment”.
J J
K
36. For the 2623.75g of cocaine in count 2, the same tariff band applies. K
L 37. For the combined quantity of 4,354.75g of cocaine in the two counts, L
the applicable guideline tariff band is still of “20 to 24 years’ imprisonment”.
M M
N
Step 2: The defendant’s role and culpability N
O 38. The defendant’s role was that of a courier as well as that of a O
storekeeper since he also took part in re-packaging some of the drugs.
P P
Q
39. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that the defendant was a Q
direct trafficker. Although $30,600 drugs proceeds were found on the defendant
R R
S S
T 3
T
HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290
4
HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho (李名豪) [2024] HKCA 150, CACC 130/2019
U U
V V
- 8 -
A A
when he was intercepted on the street, this circumstantial evidence alone would
B B
not allow the court to infer that he must have been a direct trafficker.
C C
40. As such, the defendant is sentenced on the basis of him being a
D courier and storekeeper. D
E E
Step 3: The relevant band within the guidelines
F F
41. Based on my finding of the defendant’s role and culpability, I would
G G
adopt a combined global starting point of 280 months for 4,354.75g of narcotics,
which is the arithmetical starting point for a courier or storekeeper.
H H
I 42. For the 1,731g of cocaine in count 1, the individual starting point I
would be 243 months, whereas for the 2,623.75g in count 2, it would be
J J
255 months.
K K
Step 4: Aggravating factors
L L
43. The only aggravating factor in this case is the fact that the defendant
M M
was trafficking in two different kinds of dangerous drugs in count 2. Given the
N big difference in quantity, with the herbal cannabis being just about 6% of the N
total quantity of dangerous drugs, I will enhance the global starting point by
O O
5 months, taking the notional sentence after trial up to 285 months.
P P
Step 5: Mitigating factors
Q Q
44. On the original day of sentencing, I was informed that the defendant
R R
had made a non-prejudicial statement. The case was adjourned pending
S investigation by the Police. S
T T
U U
V V
- 9 -
A A
45. Upon return, I was told that the suspect mentioned in the defendant’s
B B
statement had left the jurisdiction and his whereabouts is not known.
C C
46. Despite there being no arrest, it is obvious that the defendant did try
D his best to assist the police, and that the suspect is likely to have had some D
connection to the trafficking of dangerous drugs or else he would not have fled
E E
the jurisdiction. This information may yet prove to be helpful to the police in
F F
future. Therefore, for this assistance rendered, I will grant an overall discount of
slightly more than 38%, resulting in a sentence of 176 months after plea.
G G
H Step 6: Totality H
I I
47. I have looked at the total notional sentence after trial of 285 months,
J
and I am of the view that it is a fair, just and balanced sentence in all the J
circumstances of the offences and the defendant.
K K
FINAL SENTENCE
L L
M
48. The global sentence for the two counts after plea is, therefore, M
176 months’ imprisonment after granting the defendant the 38% discount.
N N
49. To achieve this sentence, in relation to count 1, I sentence the
O O
defendant to 150 months after plea, in relation to count 2, to 158 months after
P plea. P
Q Q
50. I order 26 months of the sentence in count 2 to be served
R
consecutively to the sentence in count 1, the balance concurrently, leading to the R
final sentence of 14 years and 8 months’ (176 months) imprisonment.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
THE SENTENCE IN DCCC 1044/2022 AND 707/2023
B B
51. The defendant pleaded guilty in two District Court cases and was
C C
sentenced on 3 March 2025 at the District Court to 11 months’ imprisonment.
D There is, therefore, a need to consider the issue of totality when sentencing the D
defendant in the present case. Neither the prosecution nor the defence was able
E E
to clarify how much of that sentence had been served, if at all, by the defendant
F F
in the District Court case. For the reasons below, I can still proceed to sentence
the defendant despite this lack of information.
G G
H 52. The District Court cases concerned money laundering that took H
place between 6 May 2020 and 7 November 2020. The defendant was cautioned
I I
for the money laundering on 21 August 2021, by that time he had already been
J arrested and detained for the present trafficking in dangerous drugs offences. He J
did not commit the drug offences whilst on bail.
K K
L
53. There is no suggestion that the money laundering was linked to the L
present trafficking in dangerous drugs. They are offences of a different nature
M M
and took place months apart from the trafficking. The defendant committed the
N
present offences knowing that he had earlier committed the money laundering N
offences. I find that there is no reason why the defendant should not be punished
O O
separately for the crimes he committed separately.
P P
54. I have also considered whether such a sentence will be crushing for
Q the defendant, and concluded that it would be no more crushing than the sentence Q
that he is already facing for the trafficking, which I have held is the appropriate
R R
sentence to pass given the circumstances.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
55. I, therefore, order the sentences in the two District Court cases to be
B B
served wholly consecutively to the present sentences.
C C
D D
E E
(Douglas Yau)
F
Judge of the Court of First Instance F
of the High Court
G G
H Mr. Raymond CHAN, SPP of Department of Justice, for the Prosecution/ H
HKSAR
I Mr. CHAU Hing-pang, instructed by Messrs. Benjamin Au & Billy Chan, I
assigned by D.L.A. for the defendant
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
HCCC 130/2023
B [2025] HKCFI 1350 B
C IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
E CRIMINAL CASE NO 130 OF 2023 E
______________
F F
G HKSAR G
H v H
I CHAN WAI KIN (陳煒堅) Defendant I
______________
J J
K Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice D. Yau K
Date of Hearing: 24 March 2025
L L
Date of Sentence: 24 March 2025
M Date of Reasons for Sentence: 24 March 2025 M
N _________________________________ N
O REASONS FOR SENTENCE O
_________________________________
P P
1. The defendant pleaded guilty to 2 counts of trafficking in a
Q Q
dangerous drug before Magistrate Mr. Lam Tsz Kan, admitted to the summary of
R facts and was, on 15 May 2023, committed to the Court of First Instance for R
sentence.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 2 -
A A
PARTICULARS
B B
COUNT 1
C C
D 2. The defendant on 22 June 2021, at the staircase landing between D
ground floor and 1st floor, Hung Fat Building, Nos.94-100 Kwong Fuk Road,
E E
Tai Po, New Territories, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely
F 1,998 grammes of a solid containing 1,731 grammes of cocaine. F
G G
COUNT 2
H H
3. The defendant on 22 June 2021, at Room 2, Flat B, 4th floor, of the
I same building, unlawfully trafficked in 3,001.74 grammes of a solid containing I
2,623.75 grammes of cocaine and 290 grammes of cannabis in herbal form.
J J
K
SUMMARY OF FACTS K
L 4. The defendant was intercepted coming out of Hung Fat Building at L
around 6:58pm on 22 June 2021, holding a red plastic bag, from which was found
M M
2 blocks of solid containing the cocaine in count 1.
N N
5. Upon arrest and caution, he claimed that he was delivering the drugs
O O
for someone at $1,000 per delivery. He told the Police that the drugs were taken
P
from Room 2, Flat B on the 4th floor of Hung Fat Building. P
Q 6. Using the keys found on the defendant, the Police entered Room 2, Q
a small sub-divided flat, and found the dangerous drugs in count 2 there.
R R
S
7. More specifically, from a nylon bag on the floor, 3 packets S
containing a total of 2,997 grammes of a solid containing 2,620 grammes of
T T
cocaine were found.
U U
V V
- 3 -
A A
8. From a bag on some shelves, a bag containing 290 grammes of
B B
herbal cannabis and cash of $30,600 were found.
C C
9. On the table inside the room was a plastic box with 13 small plastic
D bags inside, containing a total of 4.74 grammes of a solid containing D
3.75 grammes of cocaine. Two electronic scales, with traces of cocaine and
E E
0.01 gramme of cocaine respectively; a pile of resealable plastic bags and the
F F
tenancy agreement of Room 2 were also on the table.
G G
10. The defendant was cautioned at scene, and he said he helped others
H to deliver the drugs found in Room 2. H
I I
11. In the subsequent video recorded interview, the defendant told the
J
Police that he began working for a man who approached him on the internet J
inviting him to earn quick money by delivering drugs in January 2021. The
K K
defendant was instructed to pick up a mobile phone at a park in Tai Po for
L
communication, and to buy some electronic scales and re-sealable plastic bags. L
The defendant rented Room 2 at $4,500 per month with him as the only occupant.
M M
12. The man would instruct the defendant to pick up packs of 12 or 24
N N
grammes of cocaine at the park, which were then re-packaged into smaller
O packets of 0.18 grammes by the defendant and delivered to buyers as instructed. O
P P
13. Each small packet would be sold at $300 and the defendant would
Q
receive $50 for each delivered. The defendant would leave the drugs proceeds at Q
the park for someone else to pick up.
R R
14. In June 2021, the man told the defendant to pick up a nylon bag at
S S
the park, which the defendant did. The defendant was later told to deliver 2 of
T T
U U
V V
- 4 -
A A
the cocaine blocks inside the bag to a park and to leave them in a flower bed. He
B B
was promised $1,000 for each delivery of the cocaine blocks.
C C
15. The defendant was intercepted by the Police while making the
D delivery of the 2 cocaine blocks inside the red plastic bag that he was carrying. D
The $30,600 cash seized from the defendant upon his arrest was drug proceeds.
E E
F 16. Investigation revealed that the defendant rented Room 2 in his own F
name, with the lease running from August 2020 for 2 years, and photos and videos
G G
of the cocaine were found in a mobile phone seized from the defendant.
H H
17. At the time of the arrest, the street value of cocaine powder is
I I
estimated to be HK$5,879,706 (at $1,176 per gramme); of crack cocaine is
J
HK$7,569,622 (at $1,514 per gramme); and the herbal cannabis is at $50,750 J
(at $175 per gramme).
K K
18. By way of his admission to the summary of facts, the defendant
L L
confirmed that he was in possession of all the dangerous drugs particularized in
M counts 1 and 2 for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. M
N N
PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS
O O
19. The defendant is of previously clear record.
P P
BACKGROUND AND MITIGATION
Q Q
20. The defendant was born in mainland China in March 1995 and is
R R
now 29 years old. He came to Hong Kong with his father when he was 5. His
S father passed away 4 years later. S
T T
U U
V V
- 5 -
A A
21. The defendant received education up to Form 3 level. After idling
B B
for some time he started working when he was 18, earning around $16,000 per
C month as a reinforcement fixing worker and renovation worker. He worked as a C
security guard later on, making $19,000 per month. The defendant contributed
D D
$2,000 a month to his mother who is a part-time worker.
E E
22. The defendant lost his job during the pandemic. He had little savings
F F
and was not able to make ends meet. Meanwhile, his relationship with his mother
deteriorated and the defendant decided to move out, renting Room 2 since
G G
August 2020.
H H
23. Moving out increased his financial burden and he resorted to
I I
borrowing from friends and later from banks and finance companies.
J J
24. At around the same time, the defendant came to know a person
K K
named Chiu Ka Keung, who suggested for the defendant to deal with dangerous
L
drugs to make some quick money. The defendant refused. L
M 25. However, as the defendant’s financial situation worsened, and with M
Chiu’s persistent persuasion, he eventually succumbed to the repayment pressure
N N
from his creditors and agreed to help Chiu deal in dangerous drugs.
O O
26. Chiu then introduced the defendant to a man named Lee Chi Kong.
P P
Lee and Chiu told the defendant to buy 2 mobile phones.
Q Q
27. Around 10 June 2021, they instructed the defendant to pick up the
R dangerous drugs from somewhere outside and to bring them back to his room. R
10 days later, they told the defendant to bring some of the dangerous drugs to a
S S
designated place. That was when the defendant was intercepted and arrested by
T the Police in this case. T
U U
V V
- 6 -
A A
28. Mr. Chau for the defendant pointed out that the defendant had a clear
B B
record, that he had confessed as well as pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
C The defendant is willing to assist the Police, but as at the time of sentencing, C
nothing had materialized yet.
D D
SENTENCE
E E
F 29. The maximum sentence on conviction upon indictment for the F
offence is that of life imprisonment and a fine of $5 million.
G G
30. First of all, although the drugs were found from two locations, which
H H
led to the prosecution laying two charges, given the proximity in time and locale
I I
of the two offences, I find that the defendant should be sentenced on the total
J
quantity of drugs found. J
K 31. Secondly, for 290g of herbal cannabis, the sentence would be in the K
range of 3 months’ imprisonment after trial1, whereas the sentence for trafficking
L L
in the cocaine for the two counts will be more than 23 years after trial. I find that
M the lengthy sentence for trafficking in the cocaine is sufficient punishment in the M
circumstances, and I exercise my discretion to disregard the cannabis when
N N
deciding on the notional starting point.
O O
32. Having said that, the fact that the defendant was trafficking in more
P P
than one type of dangerous drugs in count 2 is still a recognized aggravating
Q
factor2, and the sentence will be enhanced on this basis, which will be dealt with Q
below.
R R
S S
T
1
For 290g of herbal cannabis, the applicable guideline tariff band is that of “Under 2,000 grammes - up to 16 T
months”: See the revised guidelines in HKSAR v Nguyen Thang Loi [2023] 1 HKLRD 1329
2
HKSAR v Yim Hung-lui, Ricky, CACC 266/2011
U U
V V
- 7 -
A A
APPLYING HERRY JANE YUSUPH
B B
33. The guidelines and 6-step approach set out by the Court of Appeal
C C
in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph3, as read in conjunction with HKSAR v Lee Ming
D Ho4 are applied as follows. D
E E
Step 1: The applicable guideline tariff bands
F F
34. The parties agreed to the application of the latest sentencing
G G
guidelines as updated in the case of HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234
for cocaine.
H H
I 35. For the 1,731g of cocaine in count 1, the updated applicable I
guideline tariff band is that of “20 to 24 years’ imprisonment”.
J J
K
36. For the 2623.75g of cocaine in count 2, the same tariff band applies. K
L 37. For the combined quantity of 4,354.75g of cocaine in the two counts, L
the applicable guideline tariff band is still of “20 to 24 years’ imprisonment”.
M M
N
Step 2: The defendant’s role and culpability N
O 38. The defendant’s role was that of a courier as well as that of a O
storekeeper since he also took part in re-packaging some of the drugs.
P P
Q
39. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that the defendant was a Q
direct trafficker. Although $30,600 drugs proceeds were found on the defendant
R R
S S
T 3
T
HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290
4
HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho (李名豪) [2024] HKCA 150, CACC 130/2019
U U
V V
- 8 -
A A
when he was intercepted on the street, this circumstantial evidence alone would
B B
not allow the court to infer that he must have been a direct trafficker.
C C
40. As such, the defendant is sentenced on the basis of him being a
D courier and storekeeper. D
E E
Step 3: The relevant band within the guidelines
F F
41. Based on my finding of the defendant’s role and culpability, I would
G G
adopt a combined global starting point of 280 months for 4,354.75g of narcotics,
which is the arithmetical starting point for a courier or storekeeper.
H H
I 42. For the 1,731g of cocaine in count 1, the individual starting point I
would be 243 months, whereas for the 2,623.75g in count 2, it would be
J J
255 months.
K K
Step 4: Aggravating factors
L L
43. The only aggravating factor in this case is the fact that the defendant
M M
was trafficking in two different kinds of dangerous drugs in count 2. Given the
N big difference in quantity, with the herbal cannabis being just about 6% of the N
total quantity of dangerous drugs, I will enhance the global starting point by
O O
5 months, taking the notional sentence after trial up to 285 months.
P P
Step 5: Mitigating factors
Q Q
44. On the original day of sentencing, I was informed that the defendant
R R
had made a non-prejudicial statement. The case was adjourned pending
S investigation by the Police. S
T T
U U
V V
- 9 -
A A
45. Upon return, I was told that the suspect mentioned in the defendant’s
B B
statement had left the jurisdiction and his whereabouts is not known.
C C
46. Despite there being no arrest, it is obvious that the defendant did try
D his best to assist the police, and that the suspect is likely to have had some D
connection to the trafficking of dangerous drugs or else he would not have fled
E E
the jurisdiction. This information may yet prove to be helpful to the police in
F F
future. Therefore, for this assistance rendered, I will grant an overall discount of
slightly more than 38%, resulting in a sentence of 176 months after plea.
G G
H Step 6: Totality H
I I
47. I have looked at the total notional sentence after trial of 285 months,
J
and I am of the view that it is a fair, just and balanced sentence in all the J
circumstances of the offences and the defendant.
K K
FINAL SENTENCE
L L
M
48. The global sentence for the two counts after plea is, therefore, M
176 months’ imprisonment after granting the defendant the 38% discount.
N N
49. To achieve this sentence, in relation to count 1, I sentence the
O O
defendant to 150 months after plea, in relation to count 2, to 158 months after
P plea. P
Q Q
50. I order 26 months of the sentence in count 2 to be served
R
consecutively to the sentence in count 1, the balance concurrently, leading to the R
final sentence of 14 years and 8 months’ (176 months) imprisonment.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
THE SENTENCE IN DCCC 1044/2022 AND 707/2023
B B
51. The defendant pleaded guilty in two District Court cases and was
C C
sentenced on 3 March 2025 at the District Court to 11 months’ imprisonment.
D There is, therefore, a need to consider the issue of totality when sentencing the D
defendant in the present case. Neither the prosecution nor the defence was able
E E
to clarify how much of that sentence had been served, if at all, by the defendant
F F
in the District Court case. For the reasons below, I can still proceed to sentence
the defendant despite this lack of information.
G G
H 52. The District Court cases concerned money laundering that took H
place between 6 May 2020 and 7 November 2020. The defendant was cautioned
I I
for the money laundering on 21 August 2021, by that time he had already been
J arrested and detained for the present trafficking in dangerous drugs offences. He J
did not commit the drug offences whilst on bail.
K K
L
53. There is no suggestion that the money laundering was linked to the L
present trafficking in dangerous drugs. They are offences of a different nature
M M
and took place months apart from the trafficking. The defendant committed the
N
present offences knowing that he had earlier committed the money laundering N
offences. I find that there is no reason why the defendant should not be punished
O O
separately for the crimes he committed separately.
P P
54. I have also considered whether such a sentence will be crushing for
Q the defendant, and concluded that it would be no more crushing than the sentence Q
that he is already facing for the trafficking, which I have held is the appropriate
R R
sentence to pass given the circumstances.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
55. I, therefore, order the sentences in the two District Court cases to be
B B
served wholly consecutively to the present sentences.
C C
D D
E E
(Douglas Yau)
F
Judge of the Court of First Instance F
of the High Court
G G
H Mr. Raymond CHAN, SPP of Department of Justice, for the Prosecution/ H
HKSAR
I Mr. CHAU Hing-pang, instructed by Messrs. Benjamin Au & Billy Chan, I
assigned by D.L.A. for the defendant
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V