[ ] Wan Mohd Herdy Bin Wan Hamid

[ ] Wan Mohd Herdy Bin Wan Hamid

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had physical custody and knowledge of the drugs; the statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da) applied to 92.91g methamphetamine, justifying a finding of trafficking under s.39B(1)(a); defence account was inconsistent and an afterthought and failed to raise reasonable doubt; chain of custody and expert analysis were reliable; accordingly defendant convicted on all three charges and sentenced (death for trafficking; concurrent 3-year terms for possession counts).

Citation
BA-45-21-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wan Mohd Herdy bin Wan Hamid
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 August 2022
Case Number
BA-45-21-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Offences (joint Trial) / Judgment and Sentencing (conviction)
Outcome
Defendant convicted on three counts: trafficking Methamphetamine, possession of Ketamine, possession of Etizolam; sentenced to death for trafficking and concurrent imprisonment for the possession counts.
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Statutory Presumption of Trafficking, Chain of Custody, Expert Evidence, Prima Facie / Burden of Proof, Sentencing and Mitigation
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Law Procedure Possession Trafficking Statutory Presumption of Trafficking Chain of Custody +3 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Wan Mohd Herdy bin Wan Hamid

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Offences (joint Trial) / Judgment and Sentencing (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved possession (physical and mental elements) of controlled substances
  2. 2 Whether the statutory presumption under s.37(da) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 applies (trafficking)
  3. 3 Whether the defence raised reasonable doubt (innocent carrier / lack of knowledge)

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had physical custody and knowledge of the drugs; the statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da) applied to 92.91g methamphetamine, justifying a finding of trafficking under s.39B(1)(a); defence account was inconsistent and an afterthought and failed to raise reasonable doubt; chain of custody and expert analysis were reliable; accordingly defendant convicted on all three charges and sentenced (death for trafficking; concurrent 3-year terms for possession counts).

Court Disposition

Defendant convicted on three counts: trafficking Methamphetamine, possession of Ketamine, possession of Etizolam; sentenced to death for trafficking and concurrent imprisonment for the possession counts.

Orders

  • Convicted of trafficking Methamphetamine (92.91g) under s.39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 and sentenced to death under s.39B(2) ADB 1952 (sentence effected pursuant to s.277 Criminal Procedure Code).
  • Convicted of possession of Ketamine (3.60g) under s.12(2) ADB 1952 and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.