PENDAKWARAYA MOHD FAIRUZ AZMI BIN ABDUL LATIP

PENDAKWARAYA MOHD FAIRUZ AZMI BIN ABDUL LATIP

Prosecution proved all elements of Section 15(1)(a) DDA 1952 and that the accused had two prior convictions; lawful urine testing and laboratory analysis established presence of morphine and invoked the presumption under Section 37(k); therefore a prima facie case existed, accused was called to defend, elected silence, and on the unrebuffed prosecution case the accused was convicted under Section 15(1)(a) read with Section 39C(1) and sentenced to six years' imprisonment and two strokes of the rotan.

Citation
WA-62D-755-11/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Mohd Fairuz Azmi bin Abdul Latip
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 February 2021
Case Number
WA-62D-755-11/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (dangerous Drugs) / Close of Prosecution, Accused Called to Defend and Then Sentenced
Outcome
Accused convicted under Section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with Section 39C(1) and sentenced
Legal Topics
Self Administration (section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952), Increased Penalty for Repeat Offenders (section 39 C(1) DDA 1952), Presumption From Urine Test (section 37(k) DDA 1952), Prima Facie Standard and Burden at Close of Prosecution (s180 Ktj), Admissibility and Weight of Chemist's Report
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics/drug Offences Evidence Self Administration (section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) Increased Penalty for Repeat Offenders (section 39 C(1) DDA 1952) Presumption From Urine Test (section 37(k) DDA 1952) Prima Facie Standard and Burden at Close of Prosecution (s180 Ktj) Admissibility and Weight of Chemist's Report

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Mohd Fairuz Azmi bin Abdul Latip

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (dangerous Drugs) / Close of Prosecution, Accused Called to Defend and Then Sentenced

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case under Section 15(1)(a) DDA 1952
  2. 2 Whether Section 37(k) presumption applies based on urine test conducted under Section 31A
  3. 3 Whether the drug in the urine sample is morphine as required by the Schedule

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved all elements of Section 15(1)(a) DDA 1952 and that the accused had two prior convictions; lawful urine testing and laboratory analysis established presence of morphine and invoked the presumption under Section 37(k); therefore a prima facie case existed, accused was called to defend, elected silence, and on the unrebuffed prosecution case the accused was convicted under Section 15(1)(a) read with Section 39C(1) and sentenced to six years' imprisonment and two strokes of the rotan.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted under Section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with Section 39C(1) and sentenced

Orders

  • Accused ordered to enter defence (prima facie case found)
  • Sentence: six (6) years imprisonment from date of arrest