R v Suwannagate [2010] NSWDC 201

R v Suwannagate [2010] NSWDC 201

The Court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew the blue chiller bag in her car contained MDMA and methylamphetamine to be supplied at a rave party, and that she intentionally exercised custody and control over those drugs to the exclusion of others except Damian. She did not establish on the balance of probabilities that those drugs were possessed for purposes other than supply. The Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she knew cocaine was in the bag, and the Crown could not prove any unlawful purpose for possession of the counterfeit banknote.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution / Judge Alone Trial Verdict and Reasons
Outcome
Guilty on Counts 1 and 3; not guilty on Counts 2 and 4.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Drugs' 'burden and Standard of Proof' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'counterfeit Banknote Possession for an Unlawful Purpose' 'judge Alone Trial']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Drugs' 'burden and Standard of Proof' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'counterfeit Banknote Possession for an Unlawful Purpose' 'judge Alone Trial']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution / Judge Alone Trial Verdict and Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed the prohibited drugs particularised in Counts 1 to 3, including knowledge and custody of them.' 'Whether, if possession of traffickable quantities was proved, the accused established on the balance of probabilities that the drugs were possessed for purposes other than supply.' 'Whether the Crown proved that the accused possessed the paper resembling a $100 Australian banknote for an unlawful purpose.' 'Whether inferences from the circumstances excluded reasonable hypotheses consistent with innocence for each count.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew the blue chiller bag in her car contained MDMA and methylamphetamine to be supplied at a rave party, and that she intentionally exercised custody and control over those drugs to the exclusion of others except Damian. She did not establish on the balance of probabilities that those drugs were possessed for purposes other than supply. The Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she knew cocaine was in the bag, and the Crown could not prove any unlawful purpose for possession of the counterfeit banknote.

Court Disposition

Guilty on Counts 1 and 3; not guilty on Counts 2 and 4.

Orders

  • ['Count 1 - Guilty' 'Count 2 - Not Guilty' 'Count 3 - Guilty' 'Count 4 - Not Guilty']