EMEKA JOHN PAUL vs PP - 2016 MarsdenLR 2555

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 MarsdenLR 2555

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
EMEKA JOHN PAUL – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent

Table of Content
1. the appellant was charged with serious drug offenses leading to conviction. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. discrepancies in drug weight raised questions regarding evidence integrity. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. the court found no merit in the defense arguments regarding the weight of the evidence. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 17)
4. knowledge about the drugs was a crucial factor in affirming the conviction. (Para 13 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. the appeal was dismissed with the conviction upheld. (Para 21)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Prasad Sandosham Abraham JCA:

[1] The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death by the High COURT at Shah Alam on the following amended charge:

"Bahawa kamu pada 28 Februari 2012 hingga 1 Mac 2012 jam lebih kurang antara 11.30 malam hingga 4.05 petang di Wad 6C, Bulk 28, Hospital Serdang, di dalam daerah Sepang, di dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan telah memperedarkan dadah merbahaya iaitu Methamnphetamine sejumlah berat 730.9 gram dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan kesalahan di bawah s 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 dan boleh dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama"

[2] Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the appellant appealed to the COURT of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 MarsdenLR 2555

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAEMEKA JOHN PAUL – AppellantVersusPP – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
EMEKA JOHN PAUL – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent