Yi Sha [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Yi Sha [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

On the totality of the evidence the Court held the prosecution had established trafficking: the presumption under s.37(d) was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities, the appellant’s innocent carrier defence was disbelieved and wilful blindness applied; the large quantity supported inference of trafficking; conviction and death sentence affirmed.

Citation
B-05(M)-393-08/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Yi Sha (Passport: E32543618); Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 March 2022
Case Number
B-05(M)-393-08/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Possession Under S.37(d), Innocent Carrier, Willful Blindness, Burden of Proof, Death Penalty
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Appellate Procedure Trafficking Possession Presumption of Possession Under S.37(d) Innocent Carrier Willful Blindness +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yi Sha (Passport: E32543618)

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved a prima facie case to require the defence to be called
  2. 2 Whether the presumption under section 37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 was rebutted on balance of probabilities
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was an innocent carrier or was wilfully blind to the presence of drugs

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the evidence the Court held the prosecution had established trafficking: the presumption under s.37(d) was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities, the appellant’s innocent carrier defence was disbelieved and wilful blindness applied; the large quantity supported inference of trafficking; conviction and death sentence affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Conviction under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentence of death affirmed.