ISMAIL BIN IDIRIS

ISMAIL BIN IDIRIS

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the chemical identity and weight of the drug and established custody/control by the accused (bag in plain view on bed within two feet, only accused in room, intact chain of custody); s.37(d) presumption of possession and knowledge was triggered and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; conviction under s.12(2) ADB punishable under s.39A(1) ADB was therefore warranted.

Citation
AP-83D-328-10/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Ismail bin Idiris
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 October 2024
Case Number
AP-83D-328-10/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Offence (possession of Methamphetamine) / Judgment After Full Trial; Sentence Imposed; Appeal Pending
Outcome
Accused found guilty and convicted under section 12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 punishable under section 39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Substance, Section 37(d) Presumption (deemed Possession/knowledge), Chain of Custody, Credibility of Police Witnesses, Sentencing and Stay Pending Appeal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Law Procedure Possession of Controlled Substance Section 37(d) Presumption (deemed Possession/knowledge) Chain of Custody Credibility of Police Witnesses +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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Ismail bin Idiris

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Offence (possession of Methamphetamine) / Judgment After Full Trial; Sentence Imposed; Appeal Pending

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved the substance and its weight as Methamphetamine
  2. 2 Whether the accused had custody or control of the drug (possession)
  3. 3 Whether s.37(d) Dangerous Drugs Act presumption of possession/knowledge was properly triggered and rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the chemical identity and weight of the drug and established custody/control by the accused (bag in plain view on bed within two feet, only accused in room, intact chain of custody); s.37(d) presumption of possession and knowledge was triggered and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; conviction under s.12(2) ADB punishable under s.39A(1) ADB was therefore warranted.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty and convicted under section 12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 punishable under section 39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.

Orders

  • Sentence: Imprisonment for 2 years 8 months from date of conviction.
  • Corporal punishment: 3 strokes of the cane.