Calvin Low Chan Hoe [ ]

Calvin Low Chan Hoe [ ]

The Court upheld the High Court conviction because the prosecution proved the appellant was in actual possession of parcels containing 3,448.1g methamphetamine, the chain of custody was intact, the appellant's conduct (false name, agitation) and circumstances permitted an inference of knowledge, and the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da) was not rebutted on balance of probabilities; failures to investigate others or obtain phone/CCTV evidence were immaterial to guilt.

Citation
S-05(SH)-478-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Calvin Low Chan Hoe; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
SH
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 August 2025
Case Number
S-05(SH)-478-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking (dangerous Drugs Act 1952) / Appeal to Court of Appeal Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court conviction and sentence affirmed.
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Trafficking, Knowledge, Chain of Custody, Investigation Procedure, Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Procedural Law Trafficking Possession Presumption of Trafficking Knowledge +3 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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Calvin Low Chan Hoe

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking (dangerous Drugs Act 1952) / Appeal to Court of Appeal Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether investigation was incomplete (failure to forensically analyse seized phone, trace sender 'Kenny', or obtain CCTV)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved knowledge of the drug contents
  3. 3 Whether there was a break in chain of custody

Ratio Decidendi

The Court upheld the High Court conviction because the prosecution proved the appellant was in actual possession of parcels containing 3,448.1g methamphetamine, the chain of custody was intact, the appellant's conduct (false name, agitation) and circumstances permitted an inference of knowledge, and the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da) was not rebutted on balance of probabilities; failures to investigate others or obtain phone/CCTV evidence were immaterial to guilt.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court conviction and sentence affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
  • Conviction for trafficking under section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed