Back
COURT OF APPEAL SANDAKAN
HO TZE KEAN – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trafficking offence charges under drug laws are serious and involve mandatory sentencing. (Para 1 , 4 , 9) |
| 2. accused charged with trafficking under dangerous drugs act. (Para 2) |
| 3. procedural flaws in evidence handling can lead to significant misjudgments. (Para 3 , 5 , 14) |
| 4. court underscores importance of correct cautioning to uphold validity of statements. (Para 6) |
| 5. proper caution must be administered for admission statements post-arrest. (Para 12) |
[1] The accused was charged with two offences of trafficking in dangerous drugs under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ('the Act') and punishable under s 39B(2) of the same Act.
[2] Particulars of the two charges were as follows:
Case No: SDK-45A-1/7-2014('1st Charge')
"That you, on 15 November 2013 at about 3.00 pm, at the back side of Syarikat Victory Auto Parts, Hing Lee 1 Street, Mile 3, Sandakan, in the state of Sabah, did on your own behalf, trafficked in a dangerous drugs to wit 124.04 gram of Methamphetamine and that you have thereby committed an offence under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Act 234) and punishable under s 39B(2) of the same Act".
Case No: SDK-45A-2/8-2014('2nd Charge'
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
