JALLOW CHERNO vs PP - 2018 MarsdenLR 1295

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 1295

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
JALLOW CHERNO – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Kitson Foong ,Respondent Advocate: Ku Hayati Ku Harun

Table of Content
1. knowledge is needed for possession of drugs. (Para 1 , 3 , 5 , 11 , 12)
2. trafficking in dangerous drugs involves establishing possession and knowledge. (Para 2 , 4 , 6)
3. the trial judge determined that the prosecution met the burden of proof for possession. (Para 10)
4. appellant's defense of coercion is not credible. (Para 20 , 21)

Yaacob Md Sam JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appellant was charged with trafficking in dangerous drugs, to wit 456.2 grams of Methamphetamine, an offence punishable under s 39B(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ( DDA ). The offence was said to have been committed on 01 March 2012 at around 01.00 p.m., at Bangunan Terminal Utama KLIA Aras 3, Terminal Utama Lapangan Terbang Antarabangsa Kuala Lumpur, Selangor (KLIA).

[2] At the end of the prosecution's case, the learned trial judge ruled that the prosecution had failed to make out a prima facie case against the appellant. The appellant was acquitted and discharged without his defence being called.

[3] The prosecution appealed to the Court of Appeal on the order of acquittal and discharge of the appellant. The Court of Appeal had allowed the prosecution's appeal and directed the appellant to e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 1295

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAJALLOW CHERNO – AppellantVersusPP – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
JALLOW CHERNO – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent