Sim Teck Ho v PP: Trafficking & Possession of Drugs - Knowledge & Control
In Sim Teck Ho v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal against the High Court's conviction of Sim Teck Ho for drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The prosecution argued that Sim Teck Ho possessed diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking. The key issue was whether Sim Teck Ho had possession of the drugs, requiring both physical control and knowledge. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence, finding that Sim Teck Ho had both physical control and knowledge of the diamorphine.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Sim Teck Ho was convicted of drug trafficking. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, finding he had physical control and knowledge of the drugs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Conviction Affirmed | Won | Jaswant Singh of Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Sim Teck Ho | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| L P Thean | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jaswant Singh | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Chua Teck Leong | Derrick Ravi Partnership |
| Nicolas Aw | Derrick Ravi Partnership |
4. Facts
- Appellant was found in possession of a bag containing 130.46g of diamorphine.
- The bag was found in the storeroom of the flat where the appellant was staying.
- Appellant claimed he was keeping the bag for 'Ah Bei', a former prison inmate.
- Appellant was to receive $350 for safekeeping the bag.
- Appellant claimed ignorance of the bag's contents.
- The storeroom was accessible to family members, but appellant believed they did not go there.
- The appellant received the bag from two men he had not seen before.
5. Formal Citations
- Sim Teck Ho v Public Prosecutor, CA 11/2000, [2000] SGCA 44
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant received a call from Ah Beh. | |
| Appellant received the bag at the coffeeshop. | |
| CNB officers raided the flat. | |
| Appellant was arrested. | |
| Appeal dismissed. |
7. Legal Issues
- Possession of Controlled Drugs
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant had both physical control and knowledge of the drugs, thus establishing possession.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Physical control of drugs
- Knowledge of drugs
- Related Cases:
- [1997] 3 SLR 523
- [1969] 2 AC 256
- [1980] 1 MLJ 49
- [1995] 1 SLR 267
- [1998] 1 SLR 217
- Trafficking in Controlled Drugs
- Outcome: The court found the appellant guilty of trafficking in a controlled drug.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession of Controlled Drugs
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fun Seong Cheng v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR 523 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that possession requires physical control and mens rea. |
| Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner | House of Lords | Yes | [1969] 2 AC 256 | England and Wales | Cited to define 'possession' as knowledge of the existence of the thing itself, not its qualities. |
| Tan Ah Tee v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1980] 1 MLJ 49 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that possession requires physical control and knowledge of the existence of the thing itself. |
| Ubaka v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR 267 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that ignorance is a defense only when there is no reason for suspicion and no right and opportunity of examination. |
| Yeo Choon Huat v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR 217 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that ignorance is a defense only when there is no reason for suspicion and no right and opportunity of examination. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) s 5(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) s 33 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) s 17(c) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Controlled drug
- Possession
- Trafficking
- Physical control
- Knowledge
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Storeroom
- Former prison inmate
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Possession of drugs
- Controlled drugs
- Diamorphine
- Singapore
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Drug Trafficking | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Possession of Drugs | 90 |
| Evidence Law | 60 |
| Theft | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences