HCCC168/2025

### 案件基本資料 - 案件名稱：HKSAR v Man Sui-chun Joe - 法院：高等法院原訟法庭 (CFI) - 法官：Tony Li, SC - 判決日期：2026年1月15日 ### 案情摘要 被告於2024年5月26日在油麻地乘的士前往元朗時被警方路障截查。警方在其攜帶的灰色回收袋中發現27.5克結晶固體（含27.2克甲基苯丙胺/冰毒），以及含有Etomidate（依托咪酯）等物質的電子煙煙彈。被告起初聲稱藥物供自用，但隨後承認持有該等藥物是以販運為目的。 ### 核心法律爭議 本案的核心 legal issue 為量刑（sentencing）。控方要求根據藥物數量處以相應刑罰；辯方則提出減刑理由，包括被告作為家庭經濟支柱需照顧患病親屬、承受經濟壓力，以及其及時認罪（guilty plea）及過往的慈善捐款紀錄。 ### 判決理由 法官採用 HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 確立的六步量刑法。首先，根據 HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] 的 guideline，10至70克冰毒的起點為7至11年，本案27.2克之 notional starting point 為8年1個月。其次，被告僅為 courier/storekeeper，不增加刑期。關於 previous convictions，法官認為其上次販毒罪已在11年前，且期間有良好表現，屬 exceptional nature，故不予加刑。最後，給予認罪三分之一減刑及額外1個月酌情減刑。 ### 引用案例與條文 引用 HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150 關於販毒量刑的指引；HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290 的六步量刑分析法；以及 HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234 確立的甲基苯丙胺量刑 band。 ### 裁決與命令 被告被裁定販運危險藥物罪成，被判處監禁5年3個月。 ### 判決啟示 本案顯示法院在處理有前科的販毒犯時，若前科與現罪之間有顯著時間間隔（本案為11年）且被告能證明期間有正向社會貢獻（如定期捐款），法官在行使酌情權時可能會將其視為 exceptional nature 而不予加刑。 --- ### 免責聲明 本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details - Case Name: HKSAR v Man Sui-chun Joe - Court: Court of First Instance (CFI) - Judge: Tony Li, SC - Date of Judgment: 15 January 2026 ### Factual Background The defendant was stopped at a police roadblock in Yau Ma Tei on 26 May 2024 while traveling by taxi. Police searched her bag and found 27.5 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 27.2 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, along with several cartridges containing Etomidate. Although she initially claimed the drugs were for personal use, she later admitted to possessing them for the purpose of trafficking. ### Key Legal Issues The primary issue was the determination of an appropriate sentence. The defense argued for leniency based on the defendant's role as the family's primary breadwinner caring for ill relatives, her economic hardship, her timely guilty plea, and her history of charitable donations. ### Ratio Decidendi The judge applied the six-step sentencing framework from Herry Jane Yusuph. Based on the quantity (27.2g), the notional starting point was 8 years and 1 month per the Huang Ruifang guidelines. The judge found the defendant was merely a courier/storekeeper. Despite previous trafficking convictions, the judge declined to enhance the sentence because the last offense occurred 11 years prior and the defendant had shown a 'new leaf' through donations and certifications, treating this as an exceptional case. ### Key Precedents & Statutes HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150 (sentencing approach); HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290 (six-step framework); HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234 (methamphetamine guideline bands). ### Decision & Orders The defendant was sentenced to 5 years and 3 months' imprisonment. ### Key Takeaways The judgment highlights that a substantial time gap between previous trafficking convictions and the current offense, combined with evidence of positive social conduct (e.g., regular donations), may persuade a judge to waive sentencing enhancements for recidivism. --- ### Disclaimer This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.