MUHAMMAD DANIEL MARICAN BIN KAMARUDDIN

MUHAMMAD DANIEL MARICAN BIN KAMARUDDIN

The High Court found the prosecution proved the essential elements: the cannabis (38.45 g) was seized from the appellant's hand, establishing possession, control and knowledge (concealment supported inference of knowledge); chemist analysis and uncontested identification of exhibits maintained chain of custody; the urine specimen was labelled/sealed in appellant's presence, stored securely and lab analysis detected THC metabolite invoking s37(k) presumption which the appellant failed to rebut. Therefore convictions under s39A(1) and s15(1)(a) ADB 1952 were proper and the sentences were within lawful discretionary range and not interfered with.

Citation
AA-41S-8-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/perayu: Muhammad Daniel Marican bin Kamaruddin; Respondent/pendakwa: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 October 2024
Case Number
AA-41S-8-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Appeal to High Court Heard and Decided (determination of Conviction and Sentence)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Consumption of Drugs (urine Test), Chain of Custody, Presumptions Under S37(k) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Appellate Review of Sentence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Possession of Controlled Drugs Consumption of Drugs (urine Test) Chain of Custody Presumptions Under S37(k) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 Appellate Review of Sentence

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 33 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Daniel Marican bin Kamaruddin

Appellant/perayu

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Respondent/pendakwa

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Appeal to High Court Heard and Decided (determination of Conviction and Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved prima facie case of possession with knowledge and control
  2. 2 Whether chain of custody for seized cannabis and urine specimen was intact
  3. 3 Whether presumption under s37(k) ADB 1952 applies and was rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found the prosecution proved the essential elements: the cannabis (38.45 g) was seized from the appellant's hand, establishing possession, control and knowledge (concealment supported inference of knowledge); chemist analysis and uncontested identification of exhibits maintained chain of custody; the urine specimen was labelled/sealed in appellant's presence, stored securely and lab analysis detected THC metabolite invoking s37(k) presumption which the appellant failed to rebut. Therefore convictions under s39A(1) and s15(1)(a) ADB 1952 were proper and the sentences were within lawful discretionary range and not interfered with.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed

Orders

  • Conviction under s39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (possession of 38.45 g cannabis) affirmed
  • Conviction under s15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (consumption; urine positive for 11-nor-delta-9-THC-9-carboxylic acid) affirmed