A A
B B
DCCC 797/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1020 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 797 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHUM CHI YIN I
----------------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam K
Date: 16 June 2025
L L
Present: Mr Chau Yik Lok, Martin, Public Prosecutor for HKSAR
M Mr Wong Kwok Chuen, Peter, instructed by SSW & M
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: [1] Trafficking in a dangerous drug（販運危險藥物） O
P
[2] Assaulting police officers in the due execution of their P
duties（襲擊在正當執行職務的警務人員）
Q Q
[3] Failure to comply with requirement to produce proof of
R identity for inspection（沒有遵從要求出示身分證明以供 R
查閱）
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
-----------------------------------------
C REASONS FOR SENTENCE C
-----------------------------------------
D D
E 1. Mr Chum pleaded guilty before me to 3 charges on a Charge E
Sheet as follows.
F F
G 2. Charge 1 is Trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to G
section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.
H H
Particulars are that he, on 18 October 2023, outside No 214 Fuk Wing
I Street, Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a I
dangerous drug, namely 7.94 grammes of a mixture containing 6.44
J J
grammes of heroin hydrochloride.
K K
3. Charge 2 is Assaulting police officers in the due execution of
L L
their duties, contrary to section 36(b) of the Offences against the Person
M Ordinance, Cap 212. Particulars are that he, on the same date, at the same M
place, in Hong Kong, assaulted Police Constable 27649 and Woman Police
N N
Constable 35091, police officers of the Hong Kong Police Force, in the due
O execution of their duties. O
P P
4. Charge 3 is Failure to comply with requirement to produce
Q proof of identity for inspection, contrary to section 49(1) of the Public Q
Order Ordinance, Cap 245. Particulars are that he, on the same date, at the
R R
same place, in Hong Kong, failed to produce proof of his identity for
S inspection upon being required so to do by a police officer, namely, Police S
Constable 27649.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
Facts admitted by Mr Chum
C C
5. On 18 October 2023, at about 4:16 am, Mr Chum was walking
D D
furtively in Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, and he was turning right from Camp
E Street to Fuk Wing Street. Patrolling uniformed police stopped him outside E
No 214 Fuk Wing Street for inquiry.
F F
G 6. PC27649 (PW2) asked Mr Chum to produce his HKID card. G
Mr Chum replied he forgot to bring it (Charge 3).
H H
I 7. PW2 started a body search on Mr Chum. When the left I
trouser pocket was being searched, Mr Chum resisted and took out from
J J
the pocket a transparent resealable plastic bag containing 6 plastic bags
K containing a total of 23 packets containing 7.94 grammes of a mixture K
containing 6.44 grammes of heroin hydrochloride (“the drugs”)(Charge 1).
L L
M 8. PW2 held Mr Chum’s left hand. Mr Chum punched PW2’s M
abdomen, and pushed another officer WPC35091 (PW1) onto the ground.
N N
Mr Chum threw the drugs onto the ground. PW1 and PW2 subdued Mr
O Chum; but he kept hitting PW1 and PW2 with his legs and elbows (Charge O
2).
P P
Q 9. Mr Chum was arrested. On Mr Chum were found two mobile Q
phones and 4 SIM cards. No cash was found on Mr Chum.
R R
S 10. Nothing incriminating was found during the search of Mr S
Chum’s residence in Shek Kip Mei Estate which was about 650 metres
T T
from the scene.
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C 11. During subsequent written records of interview and a VRI, Mr C
Chum stated the following:
D D
E (a) He resided in Shek Kip Mei Estate, Sham Shui Po; E
F F
(b) Shortly before interception, he was returning home
G from his work place in Camp Street and he met a friend G
called “Ar Ming” in the same street co-incidentally;
H H
I (c) He paid “Ar Ming” $2,400 for the drugs which were I
purchased for self-consumption;
J J
K (d) He was intercepted by the police on his way home; K
L L
(e) He threw the drugs onto the ground, punched PW2’s
M abdomen and pushed PW1; he did all that because he M
was scared and wanted to flee as drugs were on his body
N N
and he had two outstanding court cases and was placed
O on the wanted list; O
P P
(f) He did not have the full name, HKID card number, not
Q the phone number of “Ar Ming”; Q
R R
(g) He had a habit of consuming heroin and consumed
S around 1 gramme (ie 4 tablets) per day; and S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(h) He thought he left his HKID card at home but it might
C have been lost. C
D D
12. In the incident, PW1 suffered from tenderness, bruise and
E mild swelling over her right elbow and right knee. There was also mild E
tenderness over her right wrist, left knee and right back. Her diagnosis was
F F
right wrist sprain and contusions on her knees. She was granted 4 days’
G sick leave. G
H H
13. In the incident, PW2 received a scratch mark on his right wrist,
I and sustained an abrasion wound on his right knee. His diagnosis was right I
wrist and right knee abrasions as well as low back pain. He was granted 4
J J
days’ sick leave.
K K
14. On 3 November 2023, PW2 underwent an MRI scan due to
L L
his prolonged sprain back pain. The result was he had mild lumbar
M spondylosis. Due to this condition, he suffered a permanent loss of earning M
capacity to the extent of 2.5%; and he was transferred to doing indoor
N N
administrative tasks as he could no longer perform his original duties.
O O
15. The estimated retail price of the drugs in the case amounted
P P
to about $6,304.
Q Q
Criminal record
R R
S 16. Mr Chum has 54 previous convictions, including 7 relating to S
dangerous drug etc possession and 3 relating to assault.
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
Antecedents
C C
17. Mr Chum is aged 45 (43 at the time of the offences), educated
D D
to F1 level, had been a dock worker. Mr Chum is unmarried and lived in
E public housing in Shek Kip Mei. E
F F
Mitigation
G G
18. Mr Peter KC Wong of counsel assigned by the Director of
H H
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Chum. The following is a summary
I of the mitigation submissions. I
J J
19. Mr Chum completed only F1 education. At the age of 15, he
K started to take up different odd jobs. He had previously worked as a mason K
earning $15,000 a month. During Covid, he became jobless and relied on
L L
his savings for livelihood. After Covid until arrest, Mr Chum took up
M unsteady odd jobs including being a mason and a dock worker for a daily M
rate of $800.
N N
O 20. Mr Chum has been a drug addict since he was 16. He has O
criminal records, including possession of dangerous drugs (in 1996, 1998,
P P
2001, 2008, 2009 and 2014) and assault occasioning actual bodily harm (in
Q 2006 and 2016). Mr Chum was sentenced to 32 months’ imprisonment in Q
November 2024 for the offence of a non-domestic burglary in DCCC
R R
9/2024. The expected date of release is 29 July 2025.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
Charge 1
C C
21. In R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370, 387, the Court of
D D
Appeal held that for trafficking in up to 10 grammes of heroin, the sentence
E shall be between 2 and 5 years. E
F F
22. In the more recent Court of Appeal case of HKSAR v Huang
G Ruifang, CACC 106/2022 [2025] HKCA 234, at pp 30-31, new guidelines G
have been laid down on various types of dangerous drug. Nevertheless,
H H
the sentencing guideline with regard to trafficking in up to 10 grammes of
I heroin remains at 2 to 5 years (see para 62(i)) I
J J
23. For a claim of self-consumption, the case of HKSAR v Cheung
K Wai Man [2019] 1 HKLRD 817, 830 at paras 53-54 comes into play. The K
range of self-consumption discounts was between 10 and 25%. In order to
L L
succeed, it must be established to the court’s satisfaction that a significant
M proportion of the drug was for the offender’s own consumption. M
N N
24. In HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691, 701, at para
O 27, it was stated that the average daily consumption of a regular user of O
heroin was in the range of 0.25 to 0.7 gramme.
P P
Q 25. At the time of the commission of the offences, Mr Chum was Q
out of a job (cf what Mr Chum said under caution ie that he was returning
R R
home from his workplace). Looking at the addiction history of Mr Chum,
S it is plausible that he had to consume substantial amount of heroin each S
day. His claim that he consumed up to 1 gramme of heroin is believable.
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
26. Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Wong submitted that a
C majority of the drug seized was for self-consumption; only a minority was C
for trafficking.
D D
E Charge 2 E
F F
27. There is no sentencing tariff for the offence of assaulting
G police officer in the due execution of duty. The maximum sentence is 2 G
years’ imprisonment.
H H
I 28. It has been stressed by the court of Hong Kong on many I
occasions that assaulting a police officer is a serious offence and the
J J
sentence should be deterrent.
K K
29. It was admitted that Mr Chum has previous similar records of
L L
violence, which is an aggravating factor for sentence. Nevertheless, it was
M submitted that they took place many years ago. M
N N
30. PW1’s injuries can be described as relatively mild. PW2’s
O injuries though more serious than those of PW1, are not so serious that O
affect the day-to-day living of PW2.
P P
Q 31. The offence of assaulting police officers was committed while Q
the offence subject of Charge 1 was committed. It was submitted that the
R R
sentence for the two offences can be ordered to run partially concurrently.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Charge 3
C C
32. Under section 49(2) of the Public Order Ordinance, Cap 245,
D D
the maximum penalty is a fine at level 3 ($10,000) and imprisonment for 6
E months. E
F F
33. The appropriate sentence for Charge 3 should be a fine.
G G
34. Given Mr Chum’s early plea of guilty, a 1/3 discount shall be
H H
given to him in respect of all the sentences.
I I
35. Upon enquiry by the court as to whether Mr Chum was willing
J J
to substantiate his claim of self-consumption by giving evidence, Mr Wong
K after taking instructions replied that Mr Chum was willing to do so. K
L L
36. Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Wong asked that a small
M proportion of Mr Chum’s existing sentence be made concurrent to the M
sentences to be imposed herein.
N N
O Summary of Mr Chum’s evidence O
P P
37. Mr Chum gave evidence to the following effect. Prior to
Q arrest, he took up odd jobs including being a mason and dock worker at a Q
daily wage of $800. In the week prior to arrest, he worked 5 such jobs
R R
earning a total of $4,000. His first DD possession conviction in December
S 1996 related to heroin. His last DD possession conviction was in S
September 2014. He had been a drug addict all along. At and prior to the
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
time of the present arrest, he still consumed heroin. Rate of his
C consumption was about 1 gramme ie 4 tablets costing $800 per day. C
D D
38. In the present case, he bought the heroin seized for about
E $2,400. Majority was intended for self-consumption; some of it will be E
transferred to others.
F F
G 39. When asked how much was intended for reselling, Mr Chum G
replied ½ of it.
H H
I 40. After his arrest, when he felt the urge, he asked the police to I
take him to take Methadone. After he was sent to Lai Chi Kok Reception
J J
Centre, he waited in the hospital in Lai Chi Kok till he was rid of the
K addiction. Police did take him to take Methadone each night while he was K
in police custody.
L L
M 41. Under cross-examination, Mr Chum said he consumed heroin M
lately by inhaling it using tinfoil and lighter. He agreed that no drug-related
N N
paraphernalia were found at his home. He explained that they would be
O thrown away after each DD consumption. O
P P
42. Mr Chum said the seller sold the drug to him at a premium
Q discount. Q
R R
43. Although it was difficult to get a stable odd job, it was not
S difficult to obtain different odd jobs. S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
44. When asked to explain why he would still traffic in drug if he
C was able to obtain different odd jobs, Mr Chum suddenly said that he had C
made a promise to sell. He elaborated by saying he took drug with a friend.
D D
When Mr Chum had money, he would buy drug, use half himself and gave
E the other half to his friend for the latter’s use. When Mr Chum did not E
have money, his friend would do the same in reciprocity.
F F
G 45. Under re-examination, Mr Chum reiterated that it was not G
difficult to find odd jobs prior to arrest. He also said if his friend did not
H H
require drug, he (Mr Chum) would use all of the drug by himself.
I I
Sentence
J J
K 46. The court has seen the photographs contained in a photo K
album submitted by the prosecution.
L L
M 47. I have considered the evidence of Mr Chum. I consider him M
a wholly unbelievable witness. He started off in chief by saying the
N N
majority of the drug was for self-consumption. Then he retracted his
O position somewhat by saying half of it was for self-consumption and the O
other half for reselling. Under cross-examination, when asked why he
P P
would traffic in drug if he was able to find odd jobs to finance his drug
Q addiction, he suddenly changed his version completely by saying that he Q
gave half of it to his drug-using friend as part of a reciprocal arrangement.
R R
I reject his evidence completely.
S S
48. I have looked into the admitted facts and Mr Chum’s
T T
background to see whether there was any evidence that any part of the drug
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
was for his self-consumption. His drug possession conviction was a long
C time ago. He had no cash on his person. His home was clear of drugs. C
There is no evidence that he was still a user of heroin save and except one
D D
other sentence under caution that “he had a habit of consuming heroin and
E consumed around 1 gramme (ie 4 tablets) per day”. E
F F
49. However, that sentence was uttered in the context of claiming
G under caution that all of the drug was purchased for self-consumption, G
which claim has been refuted. To the extent that the claim of self-
H H
consumption and the rate of consumption are exculpatory in nature under
I a charge of trafficking, I reject them in entirety by refusing to give them I
any weight.
J J
K 50. To the extent that Mr Chum might be a user of heroin at the K
time of the offences, there is no evidence even to the lower standard of
L L
proof of what the proportion might be of the dug seized that was intended
M for his own use. Consequently, under Charge 1, I refuse to give him any M
sentencing discount on the basis of self-consumption.
N N
O 51. Mr Chum committed the present offences whilst on and O
jumping police bail: ST RN 19021290 refers. This is an aggravating factor.
P P
Q 52. Although Mr Chum has a bad criminal record for drug-related Q
possession (not trafficking) offences and assault offences, they are rather
R R
aged. I shall not hold them against Mr Chum.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
53. On Charge 1, following the sentencing guidelines, I adopt a
C starting point of 47 months’ imprisonment, this being the arithmetic C
starting point.
D D
E 54. In line with the six-step approach set out in HKSAR v Herry E
Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, I need to classify Mr Chum’s role and
F F
culpability in the trafficking activity.
G G
55. There was no evidence to suggest that he was other than a
H H
mere courier. I shall regard him as such.
I I
56. He committed the trafficking offence (indeed all the offences
J J
herein) whilst he was on (and jumping) bail. For this reason, I shall add 4
K months to his starting point to reach a notional sentence after trial of 51 K
months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 57. In relation to Charge 2, I have regard to the fact that not one, M
but two officers have been assaulted and both sustained injuries. PW2’s
N N
injuries are more serious and to the extent of a permanent loss of earning
O capacity of 2.5% caused by prolonged back pain (diagnosed as mild lumbar O
spondylosis). I am of the view a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment
P P
fits the offence and its circumstances: Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai Kit
Q [2001] 3 HKLRD 751 considered. The aggravating factor relating to bail Q
has already been taken into account when considering the sentence for
R R
Charge 1. In order to avoid double-counting, it will be ignored here.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
58. Regarding Charge 3, the maximum penalty for the offence of
C failure to produce proof of identity for inspection is a fine of $10,000 and C
imprisonment for 6 months.
D D
E 59. I do not favour a fine because that will place more financial E
hardship on Mr Chum possibly pushing him to commit more crimes in the
F F
future. I will adopt a starting point of 1 ½ months’ imprisonment in his
G case. Again, for the same reason, the bail-related aggravating factor will G
be ignored here.
H H
I 60. Mr Chum pleaded guilty in good time earning for himself the I
customary 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other mitigating factors
J J
of weight that I can see which will have the effect of reducing his sentences
K further. K
L L
61. Although the three offences were committed at the same place
M and at about the same time, they were separate and distinct offences. One M
was not concomitant to any of the others. In principle, they ought to attract
N N
consecutive sentences, subject only to totality1 which incidentally is also
O the last step in the Herry Jane Yusuph approach for sentencing a drug O
trafficker.
P P
Q 62. Having weighed everything in the round, I consider a global Q
starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment to be appropriate. I am satisfied
R R
that the sentence arrived at after applying the 1/3 sentencing discount is
S fair, just and balanced having regard to the overall circumstances of the S
offences and the offender.
T T
1
Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai Kit (supra) at 758E-F is also relevant.
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
C (Mr Chum, please stand) C
D D
63. For Charge 1, the sentence is 34 months’ imprisonment.
E E
64. For Charge 2, the sentence is 10 months’ imprisonment.
F F
G 65. For Charge 3, the sentence is one month’s imprisonment. G
H H
66. I order that the sentences on Charges 2 and 3 are to run
I concurrently with each other, and to run consecutively to the sentence on I
Charge 1 to the extent of 6 months. The final aggregate sentence for Mr
J J
Chum in this case is therefore 40 months’ imprisonment.
K K
67. Mr Chum is currently serving a 32 months’ prison term
L L
imposed on 28 November 2024 for a burglary offence he committed in
M 2019: DCCC 9/2024 [2024] HKDC 2041 refers. He was sentenced late M
because he jumped bail (see above). His expected date of release is 29 July
N N
2025. That burglary offence has nothing to do with the present offences.
O O
68. In the circumstances, I order that the sentence for Charge 1
P P
herein shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment sentence Mr
Q Chum is currently undergoing: section 68 of the Criminal Procedure Q
Ordinance, Cap 221, refers.
R R
S 69. I further order that the sentences for Charges 2 and 3 herein S
shall commence not earlier than at the expiration of the imprisonment
T T
sentence Mr Chum is currently undergoing, but at such time as will fit the
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
consecutive sentence order that I have made relating to the sentences for
C these two charges vis-à-vis the sentence for Charge 1. C
D D
E E
( Isaac Tam )
F District Judge F
G G
H H
I I
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
B B
DCCC 797/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1020 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 797 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHUM CHI YIN I
----------------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam K
Date: 16 June 2025
L L
Present: Mr Chau Yik Lok, Martin, Public Prosecutor for HKSAR
M Mr Wong Kwok Chuen, Peter, instructed by SSW & M
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: [1] Trafficking in a dangerous drug（販運危險藥物） O
P
[2] Assaulting police officers in the due execution of their P
duties（襲擊在正當執行職務的警務人員）
Q Q
[3] Failure to comply with requirement to produce proof of
R identity for inspection（沒有遵從要求出示身分證明以供 R
查閱）
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
-----------------------------------------
C REASONS FOR SENTENCE C
-----------------------------------------
D D
E 1. Mr Chum pleaded guilty before me to 3 charges on a Charge E
Sheet as follows.
F F
G 2. Charge 1 is Trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to G
section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.
H H
Particulars are that he, on 18 October 2023, outside No 214 Fuk Wing
I Street, Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a I
dangerous drug, namely 7.94 grammes of a mixture containing 6.44
J J
grammes of heroin hydrochloride.
K K
3. Charge 2 is Assaulting police officers in the due execution of
L L
their duties, contrary to section 36(b) of the Offences against the Person
M Ordinance, Cap 212. Particulars are that he, on the same date, at the same M
place, in Hong Kong, assaulted Police Constable 27649 and Woman Police
N N
Constable 35091, police officers of the Hong Kong Police Force, in the due
O execution of their duties. O
P P
4. Charge 3 is Failure to comply with requirement to produce
Q proof of identity for inspection, contrary to section 49(1) of the Public Q
Order Ordinance, Cap 245. Particulars are that he, on the same date, at the
R R
same place, in Hong Kong, failed to produce proof of his identity for
S inspection upon being required so to do by a police officer, namely, Police S
Constable 27649.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
Facts admitted by Mr Chum
C C
5. On 18 October 2023, at about 4:16 am, Mr Chum was walking
D D
furtively in Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, and he was turning right from Camp
E Street to Fuk Wing Street. Patrolling uniformed police stopped him outside E
No 214 Fuk Wing Street for inquiry.
F F
G 6. PC27649 (PW2) asked Mr Chum to produce his HKID card. G
Mr Chum replied he forgot to bring it (Charge 3).
H H
I 7. PW2 started a body search on Mr Chum. When the left I
trouser pocket was being searched, Mr Chum resisted and took out from
J J
the pocket a transparent resealable plastic bag containing 6 plastic bags
K containing a total of 23 packets containing 7.94 grammes of a mixture K
containing 6.44 grammes of heroin hydrochloride (“the drugs”)(Charge 1).
L L
M 8. PW2 held Mr Chum’s left hand. Mr Chum punched PW2’s M
abdomen, and pushed another officer WPC35091 (PW1) onto the ground.
N N
Mr Chum threw the drugs onto the ground. PW1 and PW2 subdued Mr
O Chum; but he kept hitting PW1 and PW2 with his legs and elbows (Charge O
2).
P P
Q 9. Mr Chum was arrested. On Mr Chum were found two mobile Q
phones and 4 SIM cards. No cash was found on Mr Chum.
R R
S 10. Nothing incriminating was found during the search of Mr S
Chum’s residence in Shek Kip Mei Estate which was about 650 metres
T T
from the scene.
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C 11. During subsequent written records of interview and a VRI, Mr C
Chum stated the following:
D D
E (a) He resided in Shek Kip Mei Estate, Sham Shui Po; E
F F
(b) Shortly before interception, he was returning home
G from his work place in Camp Street and he met a friend G
called “Ar Ming” in the same street co-incidentally;
H H
I (c) He paid “Ar Ming” $2,400 for the drugs which were I
purchased for self-consumption;
J J
K (d) He was intercepted by the police on his way home; K
L L
(e) He threw the drugs onto the ground, punched PW2’s
M abdomen and pushed PW1; he did all that because he M
was scared and wanted to flee as drugs were on his body
N N
and he had two outstanding court cases and was placed
O on the wanted list; O
P P
(f) He did not have the full name, HKID card number, not
Q the phone number of “Ar Ming”; Q
R R
(g) He had a habit of consuming heroin and consumed
S around 1 gramme (ie 4 tablets) per day; and S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(h) He thought he left his HKID card at home but it might
C have been lost. C
D D
12. In the incident, PW1 suffered from tenderness, bruise and
E mild swelling over her right elbow and right knee. There was also mild E
tenderness over her right wrist, left knee and right back. Her diagnosis was
F F
right wrist sprain and contusions on her knees. She was granted 4 days’
G sick leave. G
H H
13. In the incident, PW2 received a scratch mark on his right wrist,
I and sustained an abrasion wound on his right knee. His diagnosis was right I
wrist and right knee abrasions as well as low back pain. He was granted 4
J J
days’ sick leave.
K K
14. On 3 November 2023, PW2 underwent an MRI scan due to
L L
his prolonged sprain back pain. The result was he had mild lumbar
M spondylosis. Due to this condition, he suffered a permanent loss of earning M
capacity to the extent of 2.5%; and he was transferred to doing indoor
N N
administrative tasks as he could no longer perform his original duties.
O O
15. The estimated retail price of the drugs in the case amounted
P P
to about $6,304.
Q Q
Criminal record
R R
S 16. Mr Chum has 54 previous convictions, including 7 relating to S
dangerous drug etc possession and 3 relating to assault.
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
Antecedents
C C
17. Mr Chum is aged 45 (43 at the time of the offences), educated
D D
to F1 level, had been a dock worker. Mr Chum is unmarried and lived in
E public housing in Shek Kip Mei. E
F F
Mitigation
G G
18. Mr Peter KC Wong of counsel assigned by the Director of
H H
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Chum. The following is a summary
I of the mitigation submissions. I
J J
19. Mr Chum completed only F1 education. At the age of 15, he
K started to take up different odd jobs. He had previously worked as a mason K
earning $15,000 a month. During Covid, he became jobless and relied on
L L
his savings for livelihood. After Covid until arrest, Mr Chum took up
M unsteady odd jobs including being a mason and a dock worker for a daily M
rate of $800.
N N
O 20. Mr Chum has been a drug addict since he was 16. He has O
criminal records, including possession of dangerous drugs (in 1996, 1998,
P P
2001, 2008, 2009 and 2014) and assault occasioning actual bodily harm (in
Q 2006 and 2016). Mr Chum was sentenced to 32 months’ imprisonment in Q
November 2024 for the offence of a non-domestic burglary in DCCC
R R
9/2024. The expected date of release is 29 July 2025.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
Charge 1
C C
21. In R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370, 387, the Court of
D D
Appeal held that for trafficking in up to 10 grammes of heroin, the sentence
E shall be between 2 and 5 years. E
F F
22. In the more recent Court of Appeal case of HKSAR v Huang
G Ruifang, CACC 106/2022 [2025] HKCA 234, at pp 30-31, new guidelines G
have been laid down on various types of dangerous drug. Nevertheless,
H H
the sentencing guideline with regard to trafficking in up to 10 grammes of
I heroin remains at 2 to 5 years (see para 62(i)) I
J J
23. For a claim of self-consumption, the case of HKSAR v Cheung
K Wai Man [2019] 1 HKLRD 817, 830 at paras 53-54 comes into play. The K
range of self-consumption discounts was between 10 and 25%. In order to
L L
succeed, it must be established to the court’s satisfaction that a significant
M proportion of the drug was for the offender’s own consumption. M
N N
24. In HKSAR v Tam Yi Chun [2014] 3 HKLRD 691, 701, at para
O 27, it was stated that the average daily consumption of a regular user of O
heroin was in the range of 0.25 to 0.7 gramme.
P P
Q 25. At the time of the commission of the offences, Mr Chum was Q
out of a job (cf what Mr Chum said under caution ie that he was returning
R R
home from his workplace). Looking at the addiction history of Mr Chum,
S it is plausible that he had to consume substantial amount of heroin each S
day. His claim that he consumed up to 1 gramme of heroin is believable.
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
26. Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Wong submitted that a
C majority of the drug seized was for self-consumption; only a minority was C
for trafficking.
D D
E Charge 2 E
F F
27. There is no sentencing tariff for the offence of assaulting
G police officer in the due execution of duty. The maximum sentence is 2 G
years’ imprisonment.
H H
I 28. It has been stressed by the court of Hong Kong on many I
occasions that assaulting a police officer is a serious offence and the
J J
sentence should be deterrent.
K K
29. It was admitted that Mr Chum has previous similar records of
L L
violence, which is an aggravating factor for sentence. Nevertheless, it was
M submitted that they took place many years ago. M
N N
30. PW1’s injuries can be described as relatively mild. PW2’s
O injuries though more serious than those of PW1, are not so serious that O
affect the day-to-day living of PW2.
P P
Q 31. The offence of assaulting police officers was committed while Q
the offence subject of Charge 1 was committed. It was submitted that the
R R
sentence for the two offences can be ordered to run partially concurrently.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Charge 3
C C
32. Under section 49(2) of the Public Order Ordinance, Cap 245,
D D
the maximum penalty is a fine at level 3 ($10,000) and imprisonment for 6
E months. E
F F
33. The appropriate sentence for Charge 3 should be a fine.
G G
34. Given Mr Chum’s early plea of guilty, a 1/3 discount shall be
H H
given to him in respect of all the sentences.
I I
35. Upon enquiry by the court as to whether Mr Chum was willing
J J
to substantiate his claim of self-consumption by giving evidence, Mr Wong
K after taking instructions replied that Mr Chum was willing to do so. K
L L
36. Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Wong asked that a small
M proportion of Mr Chum’s existing sentence be made concurrent to the M
sentences to be imposed herein.
N N
O Summary of Mr Chum’s evidence O
P P
37. Mr Chum gave evidence to the following effect. Prior to
Q arrest, he took up odd jobs including being a mason and dock worker at a Q
daily wage of $800. In the week prior to arrest, he worked 5 such jobs
R R
earning a total of $4,000. His first DD possession conviction in December
S 1996 related to heroin. His last DD possession conviction was in S
September 2014. He had been a drug addict all along. At and prior to the
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
time of the present arrest, he still consumed heroin. Rate of his
C consumption was about 1 gramme ie 4 tablets costing $800 per day. C
D D
38. In the present case, he bought the heroin seized for about
E $2,400. Majority was intended for self-consumption; some of it will be E
transferred to others.
F F
G 39. When asked how much was intended for reselling, Mr Chum G
replied ½ of it.
H H
I 40. After his arrest, when he felt the urge, he asked the police to I
take him to take Methadone. After he was sent to Lai Chi Kok Reception
J J
Centre, he waited in the hospital in Lai Chi Kok till he was rid of the
K addiction. Police did take him to take Methadone each night while he was K
in police custody.
L L
M 41. Under cross-examination, Mr Chum said he consumed heroin M
lately by inhaling it using tinfoil and lighter. He agreed that no drug-related
N N
paraphernalia were found at his home. He explained that they would be
O thrown away after each DD consumption. O
P P
42. Mr Chum said the seller sold the drug to him at a premium
Q discount. Q
R R
43. Although it was difficult to get a stable odd job, it was not
S difficult to obtain different odd jobs. S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
44. When asked to explain why he would still traffic in drug if he
C was able to obtain different odd jobs, Mr Chum suddenly said that he had C
made a promise to sell. He elaborated by saying he took drug with a friend.
D D
When Mr Chum had money, he would buy drug, use half himself and gave
E the other half to his friend for the latter’s use. When Mr Chum did not E
have money, his friend would do the same in reciprocity.
F F
G 45. Under re-examination, Mr Chum reiterated that it was not G
difficult to find odd jobs prior to arrest. He also said if his friend did not
H H
require drug, he (Mr Chum) would use all of the drug by himself.
I I
Sentence
J J
K 46. The court has seen the photographs contained in a photo K
album submitted by the prosecution.
L L
M 47. I have considered the evidence of Mr Chum. I consider him M
a wholly unbelievable witness. He started off in chief by saying the
N N
majority of the drug was for self-consumption. Then he retracted his
O position somewhat by saying half of it was for self-consumption and the O
other half for reselling. Under cross-examination, when asked why he
P P
would traffic in drug if he was able to find odd jobs to finance his drug
Q addiction, he suddenly changed his version completely by saying that he Q
gave half of it to his drug-using friend as part of a reciprocal arrangement.
R R
I reject his evidence completely.
S S
48. I have looked into the admitted facts and Mr Chum’s
T T
background to see whether there was any evidence that any part of the drug
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
was for his self-consumption. His drug possession conviction was a long
C time ago. He had no cash on his person. His home was clear of drugs. C
There is no evidence that he was still a user of heroin save and except one
D D
other sentence under caution that “he had a habit of consuming heroin and
E consumed around 1 gramme (ie 4 tablets) per day”. E
F F
49. However, that sentence was uttered in the context of claiming
G under caution that all of the drug was purchased for self-consumption, G
which claim has been refuted. To the extent that the claim of self-
H H
consumption and the rate of consumption are exculpatory in nature under
I a charge of trafficking, I reject them in entirety by refusing to give them I
any weight.
J J
K 50. To the extent that Mr Chum might be a user of heroin at the K
time of the offences, there is no evidence even to the lower standard of
L L
proof of what the proportion might be of the dug seized that was intended
M for his own use. Consequently, under Charge 1, I refuse to give him any M
sentencing discount on the basis of self-consumption.
N N
O 51. Mr Chum committed the present offences whilst on and O
jumping police bail: ST RN 19021290 refers. This is an aggravating factor.
P P
Q 52. Although Mr Chum has a bad criminal record for drug-related Q
possession (not trafficking) offences and assault offences, they are rather
R R
aged. I shall not hold them against Mr Chum.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
53. On Charge 1, following the sentencing guidelines, I adopt a
C starting point of 47 months’ imprisonment, this being the arithmetic C
starting point.
D D
E 54. In line with the six-step approach set out in HKSAR v Herry E
Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, I need to classify Mr Chum’s role and
F F
culpability in the trafficking activity.
G G
55. There was no evidence to suggest that he was other than a
H H
mere courier. I shall regard him as such.
I I
56. He committed the trafficking offence (indeed all the offences
J J
herein) whilst he was on (and jumping) bail. For this reason, I shall add 4
K months to his starting point to reach a notional sentence after trial of 51 K
months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 57. In relation to Charge 2, I have regard to the fact that not one, M
but two officers have been assaulted and both sustained injuries. PW2’s
N N
injuries are more serious and to the extent of a permanent loss of earning
O capacity of 2.5% caused by prolonged back pain (diagnosed as mild lumbar O
spondylosis). I am of the view a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment
P P
fits the offence and its circumstances: Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai Kit
Q [2001] 3 HKLRD 751 considered. The aggravating factor relating to bail Q
has already been taken into account when considering the sentence for
R R
Charge 1. In order to avoid double-counting, it will be ignored here.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
58. Regarding Charge 3, the maximum penalty for the offence of
C failure to produce proof of identity for inspection is a fine of $10,000 and C
imprisonment for 6 months.
D D
E 59. I do not favour a fine because that will place more financial E
hardship on Mr Chum possibly pushing him to commit more crimes in the
F F
future. I will adopt a starting point of 1 ½ months’ imprisonment in his
G case. Again, for the same reason, the bail-related aggravating factor will G
be ignored here.
H H
I 60. Mr Chum pleaded guilty in good time earning for himself the I
customary 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other mitigating factors
J J
of weight that I can see which will have the effect of reducing his sentences
K further. K
L L
61. Although the three offences were committed at the same place
M and at about the same time, they were separate and distinct offences. One M
was not concomitant to any of the others. In principle, they ought to attract
N N
consecutive sentences, subject only to totality1 which incidentally is also
O the last step in the Herry Jane Yusuph approach for sentencing a drug O
trafficker.
P P
Q 62. Having weighed everything in the round, I consider a global Q
starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment to be appropriate. I am satisfied
R R
that the sentence arrived at after applying the 1/3 sentencing discount is
S fair, just and balanced having regard to the overall circumstances of the S
offences and the offender.
T T
1
Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai Kit (supra) at 758E-F is also relevant.
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
C (Mr Chum, please stand) C
D D
63. For Charge 1, the sentence is 34 months’ imprisonment.
E E
64. For Charge 2, the sentence is 10 months’ imprisonment.
F F
G 65. For Charge 3, the sentence is one month’s imprisonment. G
H H
66. I order that the sentences on Charges 2 and 3 are to run
I concurrently with each other, and to run consecutively to the sentence on I
Charge 1 to the extent of 6 months. The final aggregate sentence for Mr
J J
Chum in this case is therefore 40 months’ imprisonment.
K K
67. Mr Chum is currently serving a 32 months’ prison term
L L
imposed on 28 November 2024 for a burglary offence he committed in
M 2019: DCCC 9/2024 [2024] HKDC 2041 refers. He was sentenced late M
because he jumped bail (see above). His expected date of release is 29 July
N N
2025. That burglary offence has nothing to do with the present offences.
O O
68. In the circumstances, I order that the sentence for Charge 1
P P
herein shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment sentence Mr
Q Chum is currently undergoing: section 68 of the Criminal Procedure Q
Ordinance, Cap 221, refers.
R R
S 69. I further order that the sentences for Charges 2 and 3 herein S
shall commence not earlier than at the expiration of the imprisonment
T T
sentence Mr Chum is currently undergoing, but at such time as will fit the
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
consecutive sentence order that I have made relating to the sentences for
C these two charges vis-à-vis the sentence for Charge 1. C
D D
E E
( Isaac Tam )
F District Judge F
G G
H H
I I
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