[PEJABAT TIMBALAN NEGERI PERAK (TAIPING)] Mohd Yusni Bin Ishak

[PEJABAT TIMBALAN NEGERI PERAK (TAIPING)] Mohd Yusni Bin Ishak

Prosecution proved physical control and possession of the drugs on the defendant and expert evidence confirmed identity/weight (337.3g cannabis); statutory presumption under s.37(da) therefore arose; defence explanation was inconsistent and failed to rebut the presumption on the balance of probabilities; accordingly conviction for trafficking under s.39B(1)(a) and possession under s.12(3) followed.

Citation
AB-45A-2-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Defendant: Mohd Yusni bin Ishak
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 June 2024
Case Number
AB-45A-2-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment (conviction and Sentencing)
Outcome
Guilty on both counts; convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Chain of Custody, Prima Facie Test, Statutory Presumption S.37(da), Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs (dangerous Drugs Act) Evidence Trafficking Possession Chain of Custody Prima Facie Test Statutory Presumption S.37(da) +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 6 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Mohd Yusni bin Ishak

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment (conviction and Sentencing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved physical possession and mens rea (knowledge) of the drugs
  2. 2 Whether chain of custody and expert analysis of exhibits were reliable
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumption under s.37(da) of the Dangerous Drugs Act applied and if defendant rebutted it

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved physical control and possession of the drugs on the defendant and expert evidence confirmed identity/weight (337.3g cannabis); statutory presumption under s.37(da) therefore arose; defence explanation was inconsistent and failed to rebut the presumption on the balance of probabilities; accordingly conviction for trafficking under s.39B(1)(a) and possession under s.12(3) followed.

Court Disposition

Guilty on both counts; convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • Count 1 (s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - trafficking Cannabis 337.3g): life imprisonment and 12 strokes of the rotan, concurrent from arrest on 22.3.2020.
  • Count 2 (s.12(3) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - possession 0.75g heroin/monoacetylmorphines): 4 years imprisonment to run concurrently with Count 1.