ROFIZLAN BIN YUNUS

ROFIZLAN BIN YUNUS

The prosecution failed to prove the subjective element of recklessness under s41(1) beyond reasonable doubt given evidence that the accused stopped before turning, possible visibility/intervening factors, and contributory factors from the deceased's bicycle; however the accused did not exercise due care and attention (failure to signal and turn while a cyclist was on his left) and therefore is properly convicted under s43(1) RTA 1987; procedural typographical errors did not render the trial unlawful.

Citation
AP-82-3-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Rofizlan bin Yunus
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 June 2024
Case Number
AP-82-3-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Road Traffic Act Offence / Full Trial; Conviction and Sentence Imposed at Magistrate's Court
Outcome
Accused acquitted of reckless driving under s41(1) RTA 1987; convicted of driving without due care and attention under s43(1) RTA 1987.
Legal Topics
Reckless Driving, Due Care and Attention, Contributory Negligence, Intervening Cause, Sentencing, Reinstatement of Prior Evidence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Evidence Law Procedure Reckless Driving Due Care and Attention Contributory Negligence Intervening Cause +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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Rofizlan bin Yunus

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Road Traffic Act Offence / Full Trial; Conviction and Sentence Imposed at Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved mens rea for reckless driving under section 41(1) RTA 1987
  2. 2 Whether the facts proved support conviction for driving without due care and attention under section 43(1) RTA 1987
  3. 3 Whether procedural errors (police report date typo/Arahan Izin Tuduh) vitiate the prosecution

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove the subjective element of recklessness under s41(1) beyond reasonable doubt given evidence that the accused stopped before turning, possible visibility/intervening factors, and contributory factors from the deceased's bicycle; however the accused did not exercise due care and attention (failure to signal and turn while a cyclist was on his left) and therefore is properly convicted under s43(1) RTA 1987; procedural typographical errors did not render the trial unlawful.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted of reckless driving under s41(1) RTA 1987; convicted of driving without due care and attention under s43(1) RTA 1987.

Orders

  • Convicted under section 43(1) Road Transport Act 1987
  • Fine of RM10000.00, in default one year imprisonment