MUHAMMAD DANIEL MARICAN BIN KAMARUDDIN

MUHAMMAD DANIEL MARICAN BIN KAMARUDDIN

Evidence established prima facie that the seized substance was 38.45g cannabis, the appellant was found in physical possession of the box containing it (showing control and knowledge given circumstances), the chain of custody and laboratory and urine test procedures were intact and reliable so s37(k) presumption applied; appellant's denials and procedural complaints did not raise reasonable doubt; sentencing was within lawful discretionary bounds and not interfered with by the appellate court.

Citation
AA-41H-7-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/perayu: Muhammad Daniel Marican bin Kamaruddin; Respondent/pendakwa Raya: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 October 2024
Case Number
AA-41H-7-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (rayuan Jenayah) Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / High Court Judgment on Appeals (appeal Heard and Decided)
Outcome
Appeals by appellant against conviction and sentence dismissed; respondent's appeals on sentence previously dismissed; convictions and sentences of trial court upheld.
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drug, Knowledge Element of Possession, Chain of Custody, Urine Drug Testing and Presumptions, Appellate Review of Factual Findings and Sentence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Appeal and Sentencing Possession of Controlled Drug Knowledge Element of Possession Chain of Custody Urine Drug Testing and Presumptions +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Daniel Marican bin Kamaruddin

Appellant/perayu

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent/pendakwa Raya

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (rayuan Jenayah) Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / High Court Judgment on Appeals (appeal Heard and Decided)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant had possession, control and knowledge of the cannabis found in the face mask box
  2. 2 Whether there was a break in the chain of custody of the seized exhibits and urine specimen
  3. 3 Whether the presumption under section 37(k) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 applies to the positive urine test

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence established prima facie that the seized substance was 38.45g cannabis, the appellant was found in physical possession of the box containing it (showing control and knowledge given circumstances), the chain of custody and laboratory and urine test procedures were intact and reliable so s37(k) presumption applied; appellant's denials and procedural complaints did not raise reasonable doubt; sentencing was within lawful discretionary bounds and not interfered with by the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Appeals by appellant against conviction and sentence dismissed; respondent's appeals on sentence previously dismissed; convictions and sentences of trial court upheld.

Orders

  • Appeals AA-41H-7-03/2023 and AA-41S-8-03/2023 dismissed
  • Conviction under section 39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (possession of 38.45g cannabis) upheld