[ ] WAN MOHD HERDY BIN WAN HAMID

[ ] WAN MOHD HERDY BIN WAN HAMID

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the drugs belonged to the accused: they were in his backpack which he wore, personal documents in same compartment linked the bag to him, expert analysis confirmed controlled substances with Methamphetamine exceeding the statutory 50g threshold invoking the s.37(da)...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BA-45-29-09/2020 (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-45-29-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted on all three counts and sentenced
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Statutory Presumption, Chain of Custody, Expert Evidence, Mitigation
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Law Sentencing Law Trafficking Possession Statutory Presumption Chain of Custody +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Authorities cited 13 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 / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved a prima facie case and proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the defendant had possession (control and knowledge) of the drugs
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 applies (weight threshold)

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the drugs belonged to the accused: they were in his backpack which he wore, personal documents in same compartment linked the bag to him, expert analysis confirmed controlled substances with Methamphetamine exceeding the statutory 50g threshold invoking the s.37(da) presumption of trafficking, conduct and surrounding circumstances warranted inferring knowledge; defence explanations were discredited as afterthoughts or materially inconsistent; accordingly conviction on all three counts and death sentence for trafficking under s.39B(2) DDA with concurrent 3-year terms for possession offences was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on all three counts and sentenced

Orders

  • Convicted of trafficking Methamphetamine 92.91g under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentenced to death by hanging under s.277 Criminal Procedure Code as per s.39B(2) DDA
  • Convicted of possession of Ketamine 3.60g under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment