Macau’s top court keeps one drug conviction for linked growing and selling

A Macau cannabis grower’s combined sentence remained nine years three months after the top court ruled that his linked growing and selling formed one drug operation. On 8 May 2024, it rejected prosecutors’ attempt to restore separate production and trafficking convictions, while also refusing the grower’s request for a shorter sentence.^[1]

From home growing to an industrial space

The defendant began growing cannabis in June 2021. He kept some for himself and supplied other people, including through sales. In March 2022, he moved the growing operation into an industrial space, where he installed several tents and lights and paid 15,000 patacas a month in rent.^[1]

The trial court imposed separate production, trafficking and equipment convictions, producing a combined twelve-year sentence. The intermediate appeal court removed the separate trafficking conviction because the supply formed part of the same operation. Its combined sentence was nine years three months.^[1]

The prosecution challenged that result, arguing that growing cannabis and then supplying identified recipients justified separate crimes. The defendant appealed too, seeking a further reduction.^[1]

One plan connected the acts

The top court focused on the connection between the activities. The defendant’s plan covered growing cannabis for later personal use and supply; the acts followed one another over a connected period. Both the production and trafficking offences protected public health.^[1]

In those circumstances, the court agreed that the trafficking was absorbed into the production offence. The fact that particular buyers could be identified did not require the operation to be broken into additional drug convictions.^[1]

The court’s reasoning depended on that shared plan and connection in time. It recognised that a substantial gap or genuinely separate decisions could change how multiple acts were treated.^[1]

The operation still brought a long sentence

The judges also rejected arguments for a lower punishment. They pointed to the duration of the activity, the rented premises, the equipment and repeated supplies. The defendant had carried on during the suspension period of an earlier sentence for illegal gambling.^[1]

His production conviction carried nine years, within the five-to-fifteen-year ordinary range introduced by the earlier penalty increase. The combined sentence, including the equipment offence, stayed at nine years three months.^[1][2]

Scale shaped the outcome

This result followed the 2022 single-plant case, where two first offenders received much shorter terms under the lesser production tier.^[3] The later case shows how linked charges can be combined while the size and persistence of a growing operation still produce years in custody. Both outcomes inform Macau’s current profile.