[TIMBALAN ] TAN TEO YEONG

[TIMBALAN ] TAN TEO YEONG

The court accepted the chemist’s uncontested expert identification and weights of MDMA, concluded the drugs were found in the accused’s vehicle while he was the sole occupant and registered owner with his personal effects located with the exhibits, found the packaging and quantity (212g) supported the presumption of trafficking under s.37(da)(xxii) DDA, and determined the accused failed to rebut the presumption or provide credible evidence (including a valid Alcontara notice) to negate possession or trafficking; accordingly convicted on both charges and sentenced.

Citation
JB-45A-10-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Tan Teo Yeong
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 September 2024
Case Number
JB-45A-10-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted on both charges: guilty of trafficking under Section 39B(1)(a) DDA and guilty of possession under Section 12(2) DDA
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Trafficking, Alcontara Notice, Expert Forensic Evidence, Chain of Custody, Sentencing Discretion
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Trafficking Possession Presumption of Trafficking Alcontara Notice Expert Forensic Evidence +2 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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Tan Teo Yeong

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved identity and weight of the drugs
  2. 2 Whether the accused had possession and knowledge of the drugs found in his car
  3. 3 Whether the statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da)(xxii) DDA applies and whether accused rebutted it

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the chemist’s uncontested expert identification and weights of MDMA, concluded the drugs were found in the accused’s vehicle while he was the sole occupant and registered owner with his personal effects located with the exhibits, found the packaging and quantity (212g) supported the presumption of trafficking under s.37(da)(xxii) DDA, and determined the accused failed to rebut the presumption or provide credible evidence (including a valid Alcontara notice) to negate possession or trafficking; accordingly convicted on both charges and sentenced.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on both charges: guilty of trafficking under Section 39B(1)(a) DDA and guilty of possession under Section 12(2) DDA

Orders

  • Sentence for trafficking (1st charge): life imprisonment (defined as 30 years) from date of arrest and minimum of 12 strokes of whipping
  • Sentence for possession (2nd charge): 7 years imprisonment from date of arrest and minimum of 10 strokes of whipping