Ejike Paulinus Chimeze (W/Nigeria) [No. Passport: A00806303]

Ejike Paulinus Chimeze (W/Nigeria) [No. Passport: A00806303]

Appellant excreted the capsules while under guard such that custody and control were established; his suspicious conduct and the method of concealment permitted an inference of knowledge; the total weight (479.9g) met the s37(da) threshold giving rise to a presumption of trafficking which the appellant failed to rebut because his innocent carrier explanation was unsupported, unverifiable and amounted to wilful blindness; chain of custody and identity of exhibits were proven despite absence of search list, therefore conviction and death sentence affirmed.

Citation
B-05(M)-267-06/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Ejike Paulinus Chimeze; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 August 2020
Case Number
B-05(M)-267-06/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Appellate Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence of death under section 39B(2) DDA 1952 affirmed
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Presumption of Trafficking (s37(da)), Wilful Blindness, Chain of Custody, Identity of Exhibits, Capital Sentence Under S39 B(2) DDA 1952
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Possession Trafficking Presumption of Trafficking (s37(da)) Wilful Blindness Chain of Custody +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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ejike Paulinus Chimeze

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Appellate Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was reasonable doubt as to the identity of 23 capsules allegedly excreted by the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to properly consider the defence of innocent carrier and whether the appellant was wilfully blind
  3. 3 Whether possession and knowledge were sufficiently established to invoke the presumption of trafficking under s37(da) given the drug quantity

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant excreted the capsules while under guard such that custody and control were established; his suspicious conduct and the method of concealment permitted an inference of knowledge; the total weight (479.9g) met the s37(da) threshold giving rise to a presumption of trafficking which the appellant failed to rebut because his innocent carrier explanation was unsupported, unverifiable and amounted to wilful blindness; chain of custody and identity of exhibits were proven despite absence of search list, therefore conviction and death sentence affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence of death under section 39B(2) DDA 1952 affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction under s39B(1)(a) and death sentence pursuant to s39B(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed