Nazeri bin Lajim v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Review Application for Drug Trafficking Conviction
Nazeri bin Lajim applied for a criminal review of the Court of Appeal's decision in CA/CCA 42/2017, which upheld his conviction for possessing diamorphine for trafficking. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, finding no sufficient material to conclude that there had been a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the applicant's arguments regarding the Judge's reliance on a co-accused's confession, his claim to be a mere bailee of one bundle of drugs, allegations of inadequate legal assistance, and new medical evidence were without merit.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed summarily.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Criminal review application concerning a drug trafficking conviction. The court dismissed the application, finding no miscarriage of justice.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Application dismissed | Won | Anandan Bala of Attorney-General’s Chambers Rimplejit Kaur of Attorney-General’s Chambers Tan Wee Hao of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Nazeri bin Lajim | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed summarily | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Anandan Bala | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Rimplejit Kaur | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Wee Hao | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ravi s/o Madasamy | Carson Law Chambers |
4. Facts
- The applicant was convicted of possessing not less than 33.39g of diamorphine for trafficking.
- The applicant claimed he only ordered one bundle of heroin, not two.
- The applicant claimed he intended to return the second bundle to his supplier.
- The applicant alleged inadequate legal assistance from his former defense counsel.
- The applicant sought to introduce a new psychiatric report to support his claim of higher drug consumption.
- The High Court found that the applicant had ordered two bundles of heroin.
- The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's finding.
5. Formal Citations
- Nazeri bin Lajim v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 12 of 2021, [2021] SGCA 41
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Applicant arrested for drug trafficking. | |
| Applicant convicted in High Court. | |
| Appeal dismissed by Court of Appeal in CA/CCA 42/2017. | |
| Criminal Motion No 12 of 2021 heard. | |
| Criminal Motion No 12 of 2021 heard. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Co-Accused's Confession
- Outcome: The court held that the Judge did not err in relying on Dominic's confession, and even if it was disregarded, there was sufficient evidence to show that the applicant had ordered two bundles of drugs.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 1 SLR 1003
- Inadequate Legal Assistance
- Outcome: The court found that the applicant did not demonstrate that his counsel's conduct fell below an objective standard of what a reasonable counsel would have done.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2020] 1 SLR 907
- Sufficiency of Evidence for Drug Trafficking Conviction
- Outcome: The court found that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for possessing more than 15g of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Review of Conviction
- Setting Aside of Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1003 | Singapore | Cited for the interpretation of s 258(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the admissibility of confessions by co-accused persons and the bailment defence. |
| Kreetharan s/o Kathireson v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 1175 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the applicant must show a legitimate basis for the exercise of the court’s power of review. |
| Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 1364 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the applicant must show a legitimate basis for the exercise of the court’s power of review. |
| Lee Yuan Kwang and others v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR(R) 778 | Singapore | Cited for the interpretation of s 258(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Mohammad Farid bin Batra v Public Prosecutor and another appeal and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 907 | Singapore | Cited for the two-step approach for dealing with allegations of inadequate legal assistance. |
| Browne v Dunn | House of Lords | Yes | (1893) 6 R 67 | United Kingdom | Cited regarding the rule in Browne v Dunn, concerning cross-examination on crucial aspects of evidence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Dominic Martin Fernandez and another | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 226 | Singapore | The original trial judgment where the applicant was convicted. The Court of Appeal upheld the Judge’s finding that the applicant had ordered two bundles of drugs. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 33B of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 394H(6)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(3)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(5)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394J(6)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394H(7) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 394H(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) read with 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug Trafficking
- Criminal Review
- Miscarriage of Justice
- Inadequate Legal Assistance
- Bailment Defence
- Confession
- New Evidence
- Consumption Rate
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Criminal Review
- Miscarriage of Justice
- Diamorphine
- Singapore Law
- Criminal Law
- Appeal
- Nazeri bin Lajim
- Public Prosecutor
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Criminal Procedure | 95 |
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 90 |
| Sentencing | 90 |
| Criminal Review | 80 |
| Evidence | 70 |
| Administrative Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Criminal Procedure
- Appeals
- Sentencing