Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
AMRAN SENIN – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. charge and conviction process details. (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. appeal process and high court decisions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. conviction and appeal from sentencing. (Para 7) |
| 4. police arrest narrative and evidence collection. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. appellant's defense statements and claims. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. evaluation of evidence and discrepancies. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. witness testimony consistency and reliability. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. analysis of police procedures and evidence. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 9. court's evaluation of possession and evidence. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 10. inference of guilt from appellant's actions. (Para 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 11. inference of guilt from appellant's conduct. (Para 45) |
| 12. trial judge's duty to evaluate defence. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 13. fingerprint evidence discussed. (Para 53 , 54) |
| 14. allegations of police misconduct. (Para 55) |
[1] On 19 June 2006, the appellant was charged before the High Court at Kuala Lumpur for trafficking in dangerous drugs, to wit, 2,741 grammes of cannabis, an offence under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ("DDA")
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
