Izwanuddin bin Kasim

Izwanuddin bin Kasim

Trial judge properly found that cumulative circumstantial and eyewitness evidence (notably SP14, SP15, SP11, SP12, SP18, SP26) together with forensic pathology (stab wound to the heart) and the accused's knowledge of concealment of the weapon formed an overwhelming and coherent chain pointing to the appellant's guilt; SP14 was not an accomplice whose evidence required exclusionary corroboration; failure to call Ros Elly and Hoo Chee Keong did not prejudice the prosecution and section 114(g) did not apply; therefore conviction and death sentence were safe and affirmed.

Citation
J-05(M)-456-10/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Izwanuddin bin Kasim; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 September 2019
Case Number
J-05(M)-456-10/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Murder Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and death sentence upheld.
Legal Topics
Murder (section 302), Destruction of Evidence (section 201), Circumstantial Evidence, Accomplice Evidence, Adverse Inference (section 114(g) Evidence Act 1950), Corroboration, Appellate Review
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Forensic Pathology Murder (section 302) Destruction of Evidence (section 201) Circumstantial Evidence Accomplice Evidence Adverse Inference (section 114(g) Evidence Act 1950) +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Izwanuddin bin Kasim

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Murder Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to convict
  2. 2 Whether SP14 (Noriskandar) was an accomplice requiring corroboration
  3. 3 Whether adverse inference under section 114(g) Evidence Act 1950 applied for failure to call Ros Elly and Hoo Chee Keong

Ratio Decidendi

Trial judge properly found that cumulative circumstantial and eyewitness evidence (notably SP14, SP15, SP11, SP12, SP18, SP26) together with forensic pathology (stab wound to the heart) and the accused's knowledge of concealment of the weapon formed an overwhelming and coherent chain pointing to the appellant's guilt; SP14 was not an accomplice whose evidence required exclusionary corroboration; failure to call Ros Elly and Hoo Chee Keong did not prejudice the prosecution and section 114(g) did not apply; therefore conviction and death sentence were safe and affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and death sentence upheld.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction under section 302 and sentence of death affirmed