Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Proof of previous convictions

Legal area

Court

27 Mar 2024

MOHAMMAD SYUKRI BIN RAMLI

Citation

AB-42S-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-42S-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the conviction because prosecution proved all elements: the accused selected and provided the urine sample, laboratory analysis confirmed morphine, and prior convictions were properly proved under statutory modes; s.31A requirements were met so the statutory presumption under s.37(k) applied and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; chain of custody and witness credibility were satisfactory and any minor procedural errors (missing bottle, date slip) were not legally fatal; sentence (8 years imprisonment and 3 strokes) was within the statutory…
5 Feb 2024

HILLARY MATTHEW ANAK MATHEW NYODEM [ ]

Citation

Q-09(H)-304-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

Q-09(H)-304-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court found the plea was properly recorded with the accused aware of the consequences under s39C, the previous convictions were lawfully proved and admitted, the procedural challenges lacked merit, and therefore the High Court's enhancement of sentence under s39C to five years' imprisonment and one stroke of rotan was justified and must be affirmed.
17 Jun 2022

[ ] AZFAIZ BIN JAMIL

Citation

J-09-168-05/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

J-09-168-05/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court concluded that s.400 CPC expressly permits proof of previous convictions by an extract certified by the officer having custody of the court records; SP2, as Registrar of the Subordinate Court who produced sealed Orders from the Court Management System, was such an officer and her certified extracts (P7(a) and P7(b)) proved two prior convictions under s.15(1)(a) DDA. RCUPA does not exclude the alternative mode in s.400 (its registers are an additional mode) and there is no conflict because s.400 expressly operates "in addition to any other mode provided by any law for the time being…
4 Sept 2020

AZIZY BIN SAMSUDIN (NO. K/P: 770406-09-5179)

Citation

RA-42S-7-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

RA-42S-7-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held SP3 was not a qualified officer under Act 7 to confirm and tender previous convictions; Act 7, being the specific law on registration of criminal convictions, controls proof of previous convictions and the prosecution failed to prove the two prior convictions required under s39C(1), therefore the enhanced sentence under s39C(1) was not available and was substituted with 24 months imprisonment under s15(1)(a).

Malaysia Case Law

MOHAMMAD SYUKRI BIN RAMLI

HILLARY MATTHEW ANAK MATHEW NYODEM [ ]

[ ] AZFAIZ BIN JAMIL

AZIZY BIN SAMSUDIN (NO. K/P: 770406-09-5179)