MUHAMMAD ASSYAKIRIN BIN SHAHIZAN

MUHAMMAD ASSYAKIRIN BIN SHAHIZAN

Accused's conviction stands because he pleaded guilty and s.305 CPC limits appeals against conviction; sentence of 5 years imprisonment and one whipping was appropriate and lawful under sections 392 and 397 Penal Code and must run consecutive to AA-62RS-26-11/2022 because the offences were distinct in date, time and victim as guided by PP v. Yap Huat Heng.

Citation
AA-62RS-27-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Muhammad Assyakirin bin Shahizan
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 November 2022
Case Number
AA-62RS-27-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Robbery With Deadly Weapon / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Conviction upheld; sentence of 5 years imprisonment and 1 whipping imposed; sentence to commence after completion of sentence in AA-62RS-26-11/2022; appeal against conviction dismissed under s.305 CPC.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Use of Deadly Weapon, Guilty Plea and Appeal Rights, Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences, Mitigation and Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Sentencing Robbery Use of Deadly Weapon Guilty Plea and Appeal Rights Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences Mitigation and Sentencing Principles

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

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Muhammad Assyakirin bin Shahizan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Robbery With Deadly Weapon / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused can appeal against conviction after pleading guilty under section 305 Criminal Procedure Code
  2. 2 Whether sentences for distinct offences committed on different dates should run concurrently or consecutively
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum of sentence and corporal punishment under sections 392 and 397 Penal Code

Ratio Decidendi

Accused's conviction stands because he pleaded guilty and s.305 CPC limits appeals against conviction; sentence of 5 years imprisonment and one whipping was appropriate and lawful under sections 392 and 397 Penal Code and must run consecutive to AA-62RS-26-11/2022 because the offences were distinct in date, time and victim as guided by PP v. Yap Huat Heng.

Court Disposition

Conviction upheld; sentence of 5 years imprisonment and 1 whipping imposed; sentence to commence after completion of sentence in AA-62RS-26-11/2022; appeal against conviction dismissed under s.305 CPC.

Orders

  • Accused convicted of robbery under section 392 read with section 397 Penal Code
  • Sentenced to 5 years imprisonment