Low Song Kim

Low Song Kim

The Court of Appeal held that the prosecution proved custody and knowledge of the seized drugs against the appellant by direct evidence (drugs found in the house sitting room), corroborative items (appellant's international passport, framed photograph, DNA on razor blade and clothing) and invoked statutory presumptions under the DDA; Exh.153 was admissible because the prosecution proved diligent efforts to locate the declarant; there was no fatal break in the chain of custody; the defence was rightly assessed as an afterthought and the trial judge correctly applied the reasonable doubt test and performed maximum evaluation, accordingly convictions and mandatory death sentences were affirmed.

Citation
P-05(M)-91-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Low Song Kim; Respondent: Public Prosecutor; Co Accused: Nantawan Aranratchapisan
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 October 2019
Case Number
P-05(M)-91-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and mandatory death sentences affirmed.
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Mandatory Death Penalty, Chain of Custody, Admissibility of Hearsay/section 32 and Section 112 Statements, Presumptions Under Dangerous Drugs Act, Reasonable Doubt, Judicial Evaluation of Defence (radhi Guidance)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Appellate Review Trafficking Possession Mandatory Death Penalty Chain of Custody +4 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Low Song Kim

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Nantawan Aranratchapisan

Co Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a break in the chain of custody of the drug exhibits
  2. 2 Whether Exh.153 (statement of Ooi Choon Boay) was admissible under Evidence Act s32(1)(i) given maker's unavailability
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge failed to give proper consideration to the defence and whether the defence was an afterthought

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the prosecution proved custody and knowledge of the seized drugs against the appellant by direct evidence (drugs found in the house sitting room), corroborative items (appellant's international passport, framed photograph, DNA on razor blade and clothing) and invoked statutory presumptions under the DDA; Exh.153 was admissible because the prosecution proved diligent efforts to locate the declarant; there was no fatal break in the chain of custody; the defence was rightly assessed as an afterthought and the trial judge correctly applied the reasonable doubt test and performed maximum evaluation, accordingly convictions and mandatory death sentences were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and mandatory death sentences affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions on both charges under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed