Shen Hanjie v Public Prosecutor: Trafficking of Diamorphine and Rebuttal of Presumption of Knowledge
Shen Hanjie appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore on February 23, 2024, against his conviction in the High Court for trafficking in not less than 34.94g of diamorphine, a controlled drug, under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The High Court had found him not to be a mere courier and, without a Certificate of Substantive Assistance from the Public Prosecutor, imposed the mandatory death penalty. The Court of Appeal, comprising Tay Yong Kwang JCA, Steven Chong JCA, and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's assessment of the evidence and application of legal principles regarding the presumption of knowledge and intent to traffic.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Shen Hanjie appeals against his conviction for trafficking diamorphine. The court examines the presumption of knowledge under the Misuse of Drugs Act and the intent to traffic.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal dismissed | Won | Wuan Kin Lek Nicholas of Attorney-General’s Chambers Pavithra Ramkumar of Attorney-General’s Chambers Heershan Kaur of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Shen Hanjie | Appellant | Individual | Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Steven Chong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wuan Kin Lek Nicholas | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Pavithra Ramkumar | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Heershan Kaur | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Cheong Jun Ming Mervyn | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Lau Kah Hee | BC Lim & Lau LLC |
4. Facts
- The appellant was found in possession of not less than 34.94g of diamorphine in his bedroom.
- The appellant claimed he was keeping the drugs for Alan, a drug supplier.
- The appellant had helped Alan distribute drugs on previous occasions.
- The appellant kept detailed records of drug transactions in his notebooks.
- Drug-related paraphernalia was found in the appellant's bedroom.
- The appellant's DNA was found on some of the drug packets.
- The Public Prosecutor did not issue a Certificate of Substantive Assistance to the appellant.
5. Formal Citations
- Shen Hanjie v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 38 of 2022, [2024] SGCA 6
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appeal hearing originally scheduled but adjourned | |
| Court of Appeal hearing | |
| Grounds of decision issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Rebuttal of Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court held that the presumption of knowledge of the nature of the drugs under s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act was not rebutted.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Credibility of witness
- Inconsistencies in statements
- Intention to Traffic
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant was holding the drugs for the purpose of trafficking and rejected the bailment defence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Bailment defence
- Recording inaccuracies
- Whether the appellant was a mere courier
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant did not qualify as a mere courier for sentencing purposes.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Shen Hanjie | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 103 | Singapore | Cited for the fact that drug-related paraphernalia was found in the appellant's bedroom. |
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 18(2) MDA | Singapore |
| s 33B of the MDA | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug trafficking
- Presumption of knowledge
- Mere courier
- Certificate of Substantive Assistance
- Bailment defence
- Hot one
- Grass
- Ganja
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Misuse of Drugs Act
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 100 |
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Sentencing | 70 |
| Evidence | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences