PENDAKWARAYA FAIZUL BIN ASMAN

PENDAKWARAYA FAIZUL BIN ASMAN

The guilty plea was valid and bars appeal against conviction under s305 CPC; on sentencing, the court balanced mitigation against repeated breaches and public interest in deterrence, found the offences arose from separate supervision orders at different times involving different drugs and thus did not constitute one transaction, and concluded consecutive sentences were appropriate because aggregate imprisonment (30 months) was not excessive relative to statutory maximum (36 months) and guilty-plea credit was limited due to prior similar offences; accordingly imposed 15 months imprisonment to run after completion of sentence in JG-83D-329-10/2019 and 2 strokes of the rotan and dismissed...

Citation
JG-83D-52-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Faizul bin Asman; Complainant/reporting Officer: Roslina Binti Mohd Juraimi
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 February 2020
Case Number
JG-83D-52-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Offence (breach of Supervision Order) / Conviction on Guilty Plea and Sentencing (appeal Against Sentence Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Supervision Order, Guilty Plea and Limits on Appeal, Sentencing (concurrent Vs Consecutive), Mitigation and Aggravation, Judicial Notice
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Control Law Criminal Procedure Breach of Supervision Order Guilty Plea and Limits on Appeal Sentencing (concurrent Vs Consecutive) Mitigation and Aggravation Judicial Notice

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

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Faizul bin Asman

Defendant

Roslina Binti Mohd Juraimi

Complainant/reporting Officer

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Offence (breach of Supervision Order) / Conviction on Guilty Plea and Sentencing (appeal Against Sentence Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether guilty plea was valid and whether appeal against conviction is barred by s305 CPC
  2. 2 Appropriate sentence given prior similar offences and need for deterrence
  3. 3 Whether sentence should run concurrently or consecutively with earlier sentence under case JG-83D-329-10/2019

Ratio Decidendi

The guilty plea was valid and bars appeal against conviction under s305 CPC; on sentencing, the court balanced mitigation against repeated breaches and public interest in deterrence, found the offences arose from separate supervision orders at different times involving different drugs and thus did not constitute one transaction, and concluded consecutive sentences were appropriate because aggregate imprisonment (30 months) was not excessive relative to statutory maximum (36 months) and guilty-plea credit was limited due to prior similar offences; accordingly imposed 15 months imprisonment to run after completion of sentence in JG-83D-329-10/2019 and 2 strokes of the rotan and dismissed...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.

Orders

  • Convicted under section 6(2)(d) Akta Penagih Dadah (Rawatan dan Pemulihan) 1983
  • Sentenced to 15 months imprisonment to commence after completion of sentence in case JG-83D-329-10/2019