SOBRI BIN ABDUL WAHAB

SOBRI BIN ABDUL WAHAB

Appellant failed to prove legal insanity on a balance of probabilities; trial judge and the Court of Appeal were entitled to prefer the evidence of the treating/rebuttal psychiatrist (SP15) who concluded appellant was legally sane at the time; circumstantial evidence including DNA and the nature and number of stab wounds established intention under s.300 Penal Code; conviction for murder was upheld and the death sentence was commuted to 30 years imprisonment from 10 March 2018 plus 12 strokes.

Citation
B-05(M)-9-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Sobri bin Abdul Wahab; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 April 2024
Case Number
B-05(M)-9-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Murder (criminal Appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; conviction for murder affirmed; original death sentence set aside and substituted
Legal Topics
Murder, Insanity Defence (section 84 Penal Code), Provocation, Burden of Proof (s.105 Evidence Act 1950), Circumstantial Evidence, DNA Evidence, Last Seen Together Doctrine, Commutation of Death Sentence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Forensic Science Mental Health Law Sentencing Law Murder Insanity Defence (section 84 Penal Code) Provocation +5 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sobri bin Abdul Wahab

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Murder (criminal Appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant proved legal insanity under section 84 Penal Code on balance of probabilities
  2. 2 Whether provocation or self‑defence reduced culpability
  3. 3 Whether circumstantial and DNA evidence established guilt beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant failed to prove legal insanity on a balance of probabilities; trial judge and the Court of Appeal were entitled to prefer the evidence of the treating/rebuttal psychiatrist (SP15) who concluded appellant was legally sane at the time; circumstantial evidence including DNA and the nature and number of stab wounds established intention under s.300 Penal Code; conviction for murder was upheld and the death sentence was commuted to 30 years imprisonment from 10 March 2018 plus 12 strokes.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; conviction for murder affirmed; original death sentence set aside and substituted

Orders

  • Conviction for murder under section 302 Penal Code affirmed
  • Death sentence commuted to 30 years imprisonment to run from date of arrest 10 March 2018