[4] Our firm's lawyer defended Li in a drug trafficking case, resulting in an exceptionally lenient sentence

【Lead Attorney: Zhiming Law Firm】In the case of Li suspected of drug trafficking, the court sentenced him to five months of criminal detention and a fine of 1,000 yuan. Given the strict crackdown on drug cases by Chinese courts, achieving such a result is clearly a significant victory. Chinese law has always been severe and strict in drug crime cases, making it relatively difficult for lawyers to secure acquittals or reduced or lighter sentences for defendants.

In Li's case, his family came to Zhiming Law Firm to retain a lawyer only when the case had reached the court trial stage. However, because they did not know which stage the case was at or the names of the specific case handlers, our lawyer had to make many unnecessary trips, going to both the public security bureau and the court, only to find that the case had already reached the court trial stage, leaving little time. After accepting the mandate, the lawyer immediately went to the detention center to meet the defendant, reviewed the case files at the court, and prepared for trial. After reviewing the court's indictment, the lawyer actively contacted the prosecutor and judge to communicate, explaining the defendant's good attitude of admitting guilt and presenting legal suggestions and defense strategies for the case, which played a significant role.

The basic facts of this case are as follows: Witness Yang voluntarily reported to the public security authorities that Li was selling drugs and agreed to cooperate in apprehending Li. Under the guidance and arrangement of the authorities, Yang proactively called Li to purchase drugs, thereby facilitating the transaction. Thus, the lawyer primarily presented the following defense arguments:

First, this case involves "special intelligence inducement" (commonly known as entrapment). So-called "special intelligence inducement" refers to a special investigative method where investigative authorities use the sale or purchase of drugs as bait to suggest or induce a suspect to commit a crime, and then arrest them after the crime is committed or the result occurs. After Yang reported Li, under the arrangement and guidance of the public security authorities, Yang conducted a drug transaction with Li. Yang, under the authorities' arrangement, proactively called Li to express a desire to purchase drugs. At that time, Li did not have drugs on hand; it was only after Yang's call that Li obtained drugs from another person and sold them to Yang. Moreover, the phone Yang used to contact Li and the 300 yuan for the drug purchase were provided by the authorities, and even the transaction location was chosen under the authorities' guidance. After Li and Yang completed the transaction, the authorities immediately arrested Li. This transaction occurred only due to Yang's inducement under the authorities' arrangement, and the entire process was guided and controlled by the authorities. Although Yang was not a member of the authorities, "special intelligence inducement" does not necessarily require the inducer to be an authority figure; in reality, most such inducements are not carried out by authorities personnel themselves but depend on whether the entire transaction process is arranged and controlled by the authorities. According to the Supreme People's Court's Notice on the Minutes of the National Symposium on Drug Crime Cases (Fa [2000] No. 42), drug crimes committed under "special intelligence inducement," whether "intent inducement" or "quantity inducement," should receive lighter punishment. "Because the involvement of special intelligence means the criminal act is generally under the control of the authorities, and the drugs are unlikely to enter society, the social harm is greatly reduced, which should be considered in sentencing."

Second, Li did not profit from the transaction; his purpose was merely to obtain drugs for his own use. The defendant used 500 yuan to purchase 0.73 grams of "ice" (methamphetamine) from his supplier and sold 0.42 grams to the undercover agent for 300 yuan. Proportionally, there was no profit. Since the defendant himself used drugs, he was merely helping others purchase drugs while buying for himself. Although Article 347 of the Criminal Law does not require profit as a constituent element of the crime of drug trafficking, from the perspective of subjective malice, the defendant did not intend to seek huge profits through trafficking, and the harm to society is relatively minor. According to the Supreme People's Court's Notice (Fa [2000] No. 42), "When dealing with drug crimes committed by users, caution must be exercised in determining the facts and charges." It also states, "For defendants who sell drugs to support their own use, the fact of drug use should be considered in sentencing."

Third, there is also disagreement regarding the quantity of drugs the defendant is accused of trafficking. Li purchased 0.73 grams, sold 0.42 grams to Yang, and kept the remaining 0.31 grams for his own use. Therefore, the quantity should be 0.42 grams, not 0.73 grams.

Given the severe social harm of drug crimes and the consistent strict crackdown by our laws, we were prepared for the worst. According to Article 347 of the Criminal Law, the sentence could be up to three years in prison and a fine. However, through the trial, the lawyer argued for a lighter sentence from legal, rational, and emotional perspectives, and the court sentenced the defendant to five months of criminal detention and a fine of 1,000 yuan.

This case was a significant victory, and the defendant and his family were very satisfied with the verdict. Seeing their smiles and hearing their words of gratitude made all the hard work worthwhile.