Hong Kong Judgment

Court of Appeal

HKSAR v. FANG HUEI PING

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Because the quantity (2.23 kg) justified a 25-year starting point, a one-year reduction for family circumstances and the full one-third guilty plea discount were correctly applied, no further mitigation was appropriate, and therefore the application for leave was dismissed.

Court disposition

Application for leave dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
  • Sentence of 16 years imprisonment affirmed.

02

Material facts

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Secretary for Justice

Respondent Counsel: Mr Kevin P Zervos SC; Ms Laura Ng GC, Department of Justice

Amounts and remedies

  • Quantity of Heroin (kilograms): 2.23
  • Sentence Imposed (years): 16
  • Starting Point (years): 25

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Judgment on Application for Leave

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Applicant pleaded guilty to trafficking 2.23 kilogrammes of heroin, relied on clear record and family responsibilities (sole support of three children and two elderly parents; father's medical condition) and sought leniency.
Respondent
Respondent submitted that the judge correctly applied the guideline in R v Lau Tak-ming, that a 25-year starting point was justified given the quantity, that a one-year reduction for family circumstances had been made and that the full one-third guilty plea discount had been applied per Ko Wai-kit; no further reduction was warranted.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    R v Lau Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370

    Sentencing guideline: quantities between 400 and 600 grammes attract 15–20 years imprisonment; larger quantities justify higher sentences.

  2. 02

    R v Lau Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370

    Maximum penalty of life permits sentences above 20 years for very large quantities of dangerous drugs.

  3. 03

    Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai-kit [2001] 3 HKLRD 751

    Credit for guilty plea is normally capped at one-third.

  4. 04

    Court judgment (Tang VP)

    Family and personal mitigation carry limited weight and may justify only modest reductions.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Because the quantity (2.23 kg) justified a 25-year starting point, a one-year reduction for family circumstances and the full one-third guilty plea discount were correctly applied, no further mitigation was appropriate, and therefore the application for leave was dismissed.

Obiter and limits

  • Undue leniency will only help the drug trade to ensnare the weakest and the most unfortunate.
  • Although the judge referred specifically to the applicant's father's medical condition he must also have had the children in mind; no more can be expected.
  • Sentencing must resist incentives that encourage exploitation of the vulnerable.

Court disposition

Application for leave dismissed

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
  • Sentence of 16 years imprisonment affirmed.

Source and reliance status

Court of Appeal · 2 May 2007

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of Appeal

Judgment· 2 May 2007

HKSAR v. FANG HUEI PING

bjbj ___ Before: Hon Stuart-Moore VP and Tang VP in Court Date of Hearing: 2 May 2007 Date of Judgment: 2 May 2007 ___

J U D G M E N T ___ Hon Tang VP (giving the judgment of the Court): The applicant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in 2.23 kilogrammes of heroin hydrochloride. She was sentenced to 16 years imprisonment by Nguyen J on 1 November 2006. The applicant is now 29 years old. She is a Taiwan resident. She is divorced and was the sole support of her three children and her two elderly parents. The judge adopted a starting point of 25 years and reduced it by 1 year because of her father s medical condition. The guideline for sentencing for drug trafficking was laid down as long ago as 1990 in R v Lau Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370. Trafficking in dangerous drugs in quantities of between 400 and 600 grammes fell within the 15 to 20 years imprisonment band. But since the maximum sentence is life, so for cases involving very large quantities, the sentence would normally be higher than 20 years. Here, as the judge has said, the amount of drugs involved is almost 4 times the 600 grammes, so the starting point of 25 years is fully justified. The applicant relies on her clear record, but in Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai-kit [2001] 3 HKLRD 751, this court has clearly stated that no further credit would normally be given over and about the one-third discount given for the guilty plea. The applicant has been given the full one-third discount for her plea. The applicant s family

circumstances can carry little weight. The judge has reduced the starting point by 1 year. Although he referred specifically to her father s medical condition, we have no doubt that he must also have had the applicant s children in mind. No more can be expected. Undue leniency will only help the drug trade to ensnare the weakest and the most unfortunate. So the application for leave is dismissed. (M. Stuart-Moore) Vice-President (Robert Tang) Vice-President Mr Kevin P Zervos, SC, SADPP, and Ms Laura Ng, GC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent. The Applicant, in person.

PAGE -

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T U V 1udk 1udk (#p# i$&`G @$_Rs Normal.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary Hong Kong SAR Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

R v Lau Tak-ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370

Case cited

Secretary for Justice v Ko Wai-kit [2001] 3 HKLRD 751

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.