Yen May Woen v Public Prosecutor: Drug Trafficking - Appeal Against Conviction
Yen May Woen appealed to the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 08 July 2003 against her conviction in the High Court for trafficking not less than 30.16 grams of diamorphine. The prosecution presented evidence that Yen May Woen was arrested with a sling bag containing 120 sachets of diamorphine. Yen May Woen claimed she had no knowledge of the drugs. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the arguments presented by the appellant.
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
Yen May Woen appeals against her conviction for trafficking diamorphine. The Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal, finding no merit in the arguments.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Judgment Upheld | Won | Eddy Tham of Public Prosecutor |
| Yen May Woen | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Kan Ting Chiu | Judge | Yes |
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Eddy Tham | Public Prosecutor |
| Christina Goh | Christina Goh & Co |
| Morris Tan | Christina Goh & Co |
4. Facts
- Appellant was arrested near a taxi stand with a black sling bag.
- The sling bag contained 120 sachets of diamorphine.
- Appellant initially admitted the bag and heroin belonged to her.
- Appellant later claimed she had no knowledge of the drugs.
- Appellant claimed she was experiencing drug withdrawal symptoms when making statements.
- Appellant claimed she admitted knowledge of the heroin because she was afraid she would not be believed.
5. Formal Citations
- Yen May Woen v Public Prosecutor, Cr App 6/2003, [2003] SGCA 29
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Yen May Woen arrested by CNB officers | |
| Yen May Woen admitted to Changi Women’s Prison for withdrawal symptoms | |
| Yen May Woen re-admitted to Changi Women’s Prison for withdrawal symptoms | |
| First investigation statement recorded from Yen May Woen | |
| Yen May Woen discharged from Changi Women’s Prison | |
| Fifth investigation statement recorded from Yen May Woen | |
| Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Statements
- Outcome: The court found that the statements were admissible, as the appellant's condition did not sap her will to make a voluntary statement.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Voluntariness of statement
- Oppression
- Related Cases:
- [1999] 1 SLR 25
- PP v Tan Boon Tat [1990] SLR 375
- [1999] 2 SLR 181
- (1967) 51 Cr App R 1
- (1972) 56 Cr App R 51
- Chain of Evidence
- Outcome: The court found no break in the chain of evidence relating to the drug exhibits.
- Category: Procedural
- Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found that the appellant had not rebutted the presumption under s 17 of the Misuse of Drugs Act that she was in possession of the diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chai Chien Wei Kelvin v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 25 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that oppression can render a confession involuntary and inadmissible. |
| PP v Tan Boon Tat | N/A | Yes | PP v Tan Boon Tat [1990] SLR 375 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that shock, exhaustion or fatigue could, in a proper case, vitiate voluntariness of a statement. |
| Gulam bin Notan Mohd Shariff Jamalddin v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR 181 | Singapore | Cited to confirm that the common law concept of involuntariness by oppression has been subsumed under s 24 of the Evidence Act. |
| R v Priestley | N/A | Yes | (1967) 51 Cr App R 1 | N/A | Cited for the definition of oppression in the context of voluntariness of statements. |
| R v Prager | N/A | Yes | (1972) 56 Cr App R 51 | N/A | Cited for the common law concept of involuntariness by oppression. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| Evidence Act | Singapore |
| s 17 of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug trafficking
- Chain of evidence
- Withdrawal symptoms
- Voluntariness of statement
- Presumption of trafficking
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Singapore
- Criminal law
- Appeal
- Evidence
- Diamorphine
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 90 |
| Trafficking | 85 |
| Evidence Law | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences
- Evidence