Back
2011 MarsdenLR 4297
ZALEHA ZAHARI, CLEMENT SKINNER, BALIA YUSOF WAHI
YEE CHEONG SENG – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
The court affirmed the conviction for possession and trafficking of methamphetamine, emphasizing the sufficiency of direct evidence over hearsay and rejecting the appellant's defense as unconvincing.
Headnote:(A) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Sections 12(2) and 39B(1)(a) - Possession and trafficking of methamphetamine - Guilty verdict upheld for possession of 6.58 grams and trafficking 191.65 grams of methamphetamine - Conviction based on evidence of police officers and chairing minute surveillance revealing the appellant's activities - Appellant's defense of non-knowledge rejected, found to lack credibility - Judicial Commissioner affirmed the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1-21)
(B) Evidence - The court upheld the assessment of direct evidence over hearsay, determining the identity and actions of the appellant were adequately supported - Arguments suggesting misidentification and hearsay undermined by corroborative testimonies. (Paras 17-19)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was arrested after police conducted surveillance from 12 midnight to 7am, discovering drugs in his vehicle and hotel room, linked to him via evidence and testimony.
Findings of Court:
The Judicial Commissioner determined the prosecution proved a prima facie case, with no reasonable doubt raised by the defense's inconsistent claims, leading to a guilty verdict.
Issues: Whether the evidence was sufficient for identification and conviction, and whether hearsay evidence had unduly influenced the verdict.
Ratio Decidendi: The court justified the findings based on direct evidence of police officers observing the appellant's actions, rejecting the defense's narrative as fabricated.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court found the appellant guilty. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. police surveillance led to discovery of drugs. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. appellant contested knowledge of the drugs. (Para 10 , 12) |
| 4. judicial commissioner rejected defense as fabrication. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. appellant's appeal on evidentiary grounds dismissed. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
Zaleha Zahari JCA:
(1) Two charges were preferred against the appellant in this case. Firstly, for possession of 6.58 grams of methamphetamine contrary to s. 12(2) of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (the Act); secondly, trafficking of 191.65 grams methamphetamine contrary to s. 39B(1)(a) of the Act. The High Court found the appellant guilty of both charges on 24 April 2009. In respect of the 1st charge, the appellant was sentenced to two years imprisonment and three strokes, whilst in respect of the 2nd charge, the mandatory sentence of death was imposed upon him.
(2) We dismissed the appellants appeal against the decision of the High Court against conviction and sentence in respect of both charges preferred against him for the following reasons.
(3) The evidence adduced by the prosecution was this. On 9 March 2005 at about 12 midnight Insp Norhisham bin Mustaphar (PW3) received information about drug trafficking activities by a Chinese man at Jalan Bakawali 48, Taman Johor Jaya, Johor Bahru near Sunday Hotel using a Proton Waja registration No. WJA 9290 (the said car). At about 12.30am, PW3, together with ASP Abdullah bin Mohamad (PW2), arrived at Sunday Hotel to carry out surveillance.
(4) Both PW2 and PW3 testified that at about 1am, a Proton Waja No. WJA 9290 (the said car) drove up and parked the said car in front of Sunday Hotel. That a Chinese man in a dark shirt alighted from the said car, then went into Sunday Hotel carrying a brown sling bag with him.
(5) PW3 and his team continued their surveillance until 7am. At about 7am a Chinese man came out of the Sunday Hotel, entered the said car parked in front of Sunday Hotel. However, before the Chinese man could drive off, he was detained by the police.
(6) PW3 identified himself as a police officer, and asked the Chinese man (identified as accused ie, the appellant) to open the door of the said car. PW3 carried out a body search on the appellant but did not find anything incriminating on him. The appellant appeared frightened. PW3 then carried out a search of the said car and found a package wrapped in newspaper (exh. P6A) under the steering dashboard of the said car. Upon opening the package in the presence of the appellant PW3 found that it contained five clear plastic packets (exh. P6A1-5) containing crystalline substance suspected to be syabu. PW3 then seized the exhibits and arrested the appellant.
(7) PW3 also recovered a key for room no. 201 of Sunday Hotel from the appellant. The appellant was then brought to room no. 201 of Sunday Hotel. The key retrieved from the appellant was then used to open room 201. There was no one in room no. 201. The police carried out a search of the room in the presence of the appellant and three police officers. In room no. 201, PW3 saw a brown sling bag (exh. P8B) on the bed. Upon opening the brown sling bag, PW3 recovered a package wrapped in transparent plastic containing three transparent plastic packages (exhs. P9A1-3) which in turn contained crystalline powdery substances suspected to be syabu. The police found a receipt issued by Sunday Hotel in the name of the appellant from the sling bag (exh. 9B). PW3 seized all of the said exhibits and brought the said exhibits and the appellant to his office, Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Narkotik Johor Bahru.
(8) Muhammad Yazid bin Ibrahim (PW4), the chemist, testified that the result of the tests carried out by him confirmed that the crystalline substances in exh. P9 to be Methaphetamine having a net weight of 6.58 grams, whilst in respect of exh. P6, to be methamphetamine having a net weight of 191.65 grams (exh. P17) the sub
