Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2023] SGCA 15 Court of Appeal 16 May 2023 CA/CM 23/2023

7 cases cited

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	16 May 2023
Judge	Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim	Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Ong Ying Ping Esq, Chong Yong, Ong Ying Ping, Stephanie Koh, Terence Chua

Source: [2023] SGCA 15, Court of Appeal, decided 16 May 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Statutory offences — Misuse of Drugs Act Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal review — Leave for review

Practice Areas

Criminal Law Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Tay Yong Kwang Delivered

Counsel (6)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Ong Ying Ping Esq Firm Chong Yong Counsel for the respondent Ong Ying Ping Counsel for the applicant Stephanie Koh Counsel for the respondent Terence Chua Counsel for the respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent

Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff Applicant

Case Significance

Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 15 is a judgment of Tay Yong Kwang JCA in the Court of Appeal, delivered on 16 May 2023 in Criminal Motion No 23 of 2023. The applicant, Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff, was convicted by the trial judge in January 2019 of possessing cannabis for the purpose of trafficking and, absent a Certificate of Substantive Assistance, was sentenced to the mandatory death penalty; his earlier appeal (CCA 3) and disclosure application (CM 13) were dismissed in August 2019. The motion concerns his application for permission to commence a criminal review under the Misuse of Drugs Act framework.

Summary

Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff, who had been convicted of possessing cannabis for the purpose of trafficking and sentenced to the mandatory death penalty, applied for permission to make a review application in respect of the Court of Appeal's earlier dismissal of his appeal. He raised arguments about undisclosed phone analyses, purported CCTV footage, and attribution of possession to another person. The court found no new evidence meeting the requirements for review and held the principles in Nabill had no bearing on the facts, dismissing the application summarily.

What did the court consider in Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 15?

Tay Yong Kwang JCA considered the applicant's Criminal Motion No 23 of 2023 seeking permission for a criminal review of his conviction for possessing cannabis for the purpose of trafficking, for which he had been sentenced to the mandatory death penalty. Delivered 16 May 2023.

Why was Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff sentenced to the mandatory death penalty ([2023] SGCA 15)?

He was convicted in January 2019 of possessing cannabis for the purpose of trafficking, and because the Public Prosecutor did not issue him a Certificate of Substantive Assistance, he was sentenced to undergo the mandatory death penalty under the Misuse of Drugs Act.