Mohamad Noor Bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor: Trafficking, Defence of Personal Consumption
In Mohamad Noor Bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal against the appellant's conviction for drug trafficking. The appellant's flat was raided, and 58.83 grams of diamorphine were found. The appellant claimed the drugs were for personal consumption due to his addiction. The Court of Appeal, comprising Yong Pung How CJ, L P Thean JA, and Chao Hick Tin JA, dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant's defense unsubstantiated and the evidence indicative of drug trafficking.
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
Mohamad Noor Bin Abdullah appeals against his conviction for drug trafficking. The court dismisses the appeal, finding the defense of personal consumption unsubstantiated.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Peter Koy of Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Mohamad Noor Bin Abdullah | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Judge of Appeal | No |
| L P Thean | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Peter Koy | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Ahmad Nizam Bin Abbas | Muzammil Nizam & Partners |
| Ramli Bin Salehkon | Ramli & Co |
4. Facts
- The appellant's flat was raided by the Central Narcotics Bureau.
- 58.83 grams of diamorphine were recovered from the flat.
- Drug-trafficking paraphernalia was found in the flat.
- The appellant admitted to drug trafficking in a long statement.
- The appellant claimed the drugs were for personal consumption.
- The appellant claimed to be a severe heroin addict.
- The judicial commissioner rejected the appellant's defence.
5. Formal Citations
- Mohamad Noor Bin Abdullah and Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 12 of 2001, [2001] SGCA 60
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant's flat raided by the Central Narcotics Bureau | |
| Appeal dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found that the appellant was guilty of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Defence of Personal Consumption
- Outcome: The court rejected the appellant's defence of personal consumption.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jusri v Mohamed Hussain v PP | High Court | Yes | [1996] 3 SLR 29 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the more directly an item is connected to drug trafficking, the more weighty evidence of possession by the accused of that item is in suggesting that the drugs found in his possession were for the purpose of trafficking. |
| Lim Ah Poh v PP | High Court | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR 713 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact made by a trial judge unless they are clearly reached against the weight of evidence. |
| Low Kok Wai v PP | High Court | Yes | [1994] 1 SLR 676 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that drug-trafficking paraphernalia is relevant in establishing whether a person is a drug trafficker or not. |
| Mohamed Bachu Miah v PP | High Court | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 249 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an accused person may be convicted on his own confession even when it is retracted, if the court is satisfied of its truth. |
| PP v Hla Win | High Court | Yes | [1995] 2 SLR 424 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact made by a trial judge unless they are clearly reached against the weight of evidence. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug trafficking
- Personal consumption
- Addict
- Paraphernalia
- Long statement
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Singapore
- Criminal law
- Appeal
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Personal consumption
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Drug Trafficking | 90 |
| Criminal Law | 85 |
| Drug Possession | 80 |
| Criminal Procedure | 70 |
| Evidence | 60 |
| Theft | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking