MUHAMMAD IZZUDDIN BIN MAZRI [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

MUHAMMAD IZZUDDIN BIN MAZRI [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Court held prosecution proved both elements of possession and knowledge by direct evidence and, given quantities, statutory presumptions of trafficking applied; statements/information leading to discovery were admissible under s27 and the informant was protected under s40 so non‑production did not undermine the prosecution; the defence was uncorroborated afterthought and failed to raise reasonable doubt; therefore convictions and mandatory death sentences under s39B(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 were affirmed.

Citation
B-05(M)-141-03/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Perayu / Appellant / Orang Kena Tuduh: Muhammad Izzudin bin Mazri; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 November 2021
Case Number
B-05(M)-141-03/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (drug Trafficking) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appellate)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and death sentences affirmed
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession and Knowledge, Admissibility (section 27 Evidence Act), Protection of Informers (section 40), Statutory Presumptions (section 37(da)), Capital Punishment Under Dangerous Drugs Act
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics / Drug Law Evidence Law Trafficking Possession and Knowledge Admissibility (section 27 Evidence Act) Protection of Informers (section 40) Statutory Presumptions (section 37(da)) +1 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Izzudin bin Mazri

Perayu / Appellant / Orang Kena Tuduh

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (drug Trafficking) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appellate)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case and ultimately guilt beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether possession, custody and knowledge of the drugs by the appellant were established
  3. 3 Whether statements/information leading to discovery were admissible under s27 Evidence Act

Ratio Decidendi

Court held prosecution proved both elements of possession and knowledge by direct evidence and, given quantities, statutory presumptions of trafficking applied; statements/information leading to discovery were admissible under s27 and the informant was protected under s40 so non‑production did not undermine the prosecution; the defence was uncorroborated afterthought and failed to raise reasonable doubt; therefore convictions and mandatory death sentences under s39B(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and death sentences affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions under section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentences of death under section 39B(2) affirmed