MUHAMMAD FAIZ BIN MOHD ISA

MUHAMMAD FAIZ BIN MOHD ISA

The Court accepted the prosecution's amended charge under section 6 DDA 1952 punishable under section 39A(2) due to accepted representation and the appellants' guilty pleas; having weighed mitigating factors, lack of exclusive control over the premises, and sentencing precedents for comparable Cannabis quantities, the appropriate sentence is nine years' imprisonment from arrest date (7 October 2020) and ten strokes, and the prior convictions under section 39B(1)(a) and life sentences were set aside and substituted accordingly.

Citation
B-05(SH)-394-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Tertuduh Pertama: Muhammad Aismat Amir bin Zainal; Appellant / Tertuduh Kedua: Muhammad Faiz bin Mohd Isa; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
SH
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 January 2025
Case Number
B-05(SH)-394-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Substituted Plea and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part. Original convictions under section 39B(1)(a) and life sentences set aside and substituted; appellants convicted on amended charge and resentenced.
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Constructive/joint Possession, Charge Amendment and Substituted Plea, Sentencing Precedents
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Sentencing Possession of Controlled Drugs Constructive/joint Possession Charge Amendment and Substituted Plea Sentencing Precedents

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Aismat Amir bin Zainal

Appellant / Tertuduh Pertama

Muhammad Faiz bin Mohd Isa

Appellant / Tertuduh Kedua

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Substituted Plea and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants had possession and control of the Cannabis found at the house
  2. 2 Whether original conviction under section 39B(1)(a) DDA 1952 should be substituted to a charge under section 6 DDA 1952 punishable under section 39A(2) DDA 1952
  3. 3 Whether the sentence of life imprisonment should be varied and what is the appropriate term

Ratio Decidendi

The Court accepted the prosecution's amended charge under section 6 DDA 1952 punishable under section 39A(2) due to accepted representation and the appellants' guilty pleas; having weighed mitigating factors, lack of exclusive control over the premises, and sentencing precedents for comparable Cannabis quantities, the appropriate sentence is nine years' imprisonment from arrest date (7 October 2020) and ten strokes, and the prior convictions under section 39B(1)(a) and life sentences were set aside and substituted accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part. Original convictions under section 39B(1)(a) and life sentences set aside and substituted; appellants convicted on amended charge and resentenced.

Orders

  • Appeals against convictions and sentences for second and third charges withdrawn/cancelled by appellants
  • Convictions under section 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 and sentences of life imprisonment with 12 strokes set aside