SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 MarsdenLR 571

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MOHD ZULKIFLI MD RIDZUAN – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


Table of Content
1. importance of proper representation in capital cases. (Para 2 , 3)
2. scrutiny of evidence despite absence of counsel's submissions. (Para 4 , 5)
3. factual background of drug trafficking charge. (Para 6 , 7)
4. standards for evaluating evidence in criminal cases. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

[1] The appellant's/accused appeal, came up for hearing on 11 March 2013 and upon hearing we dismissed it on the same day. My learned brothers Mohamed Apandi Ali JCA and Linton Albert JCA have read the judgment and approved the same. This is our judgment.

[2] In the instant case the learned counsel for the appellant did not file any written submission. Such a conduct is very unusual in appeal cases and more so in capital punishment cases. In our view the criminal bar must not accept any brief in capital punishment cases if they have no time to prepare for the case and/or appropriate submission to assist the court in the administration of criminal justice. The court takes note of such conduct with concern and disappointment. Bar Council ought to educate its members for the need to file written submission at the earliest opportunity, and in appropriate cases where there is a breach must initi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top