R v Qaumi & Ors (No 59) [2016] NSWSC 1159

R v Qaumi & Ors (No 59) [2016] NSWSC 1159

Taking the Crown case at its highest, the circumstantial evidence was capable of supporting an inference that Farhad Qaumi was in possession of the drugs in the bag of guns and drugs, not by physical custody but by ownership while the drugs were in the custody of others. Whether there was another innocent explanation was for the jury, so the evidence could sustain a conviction on count 20.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Common Law Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict of Not Guilty at the Close of the Prosecution Case
Outcome
Application for directed verdict of not guilty refused.
Legal Topics
['directed Verdict' 'supply Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'possession' 'circumstantial Evidence']
['criminal Law'] ['directed Verdict' 'supply Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'possession' 'circumstantial Evidence']

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

Common Law Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict of Not Guilty at the Close of the Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was evidence capable of establishing beyond reasonable doubt that Farhad Qaumi was in possession of the prohibited drugs for the purpose of supply in count 20.' 'Whether, in a circumstantial case, the possibility of another inference consistent with innocence required a directed verdict of not guilty.']

Ratio Decidendi

Taking the Crown case at its highest, the circumstantial evidence was capable of supporting an inference that Farhad Qaumi was in possession of the drugs in the bag of guns and drugs, not by physical custody but by ownership while the drugs were in the custody of others. Whether there was another innocent explanation was for the jury, so the evidence could sustain a conviction on count 20.

Court Disposition

Application for directed verdict of not guilty refused.

Orders

  • ['I refuse the application for a directed verdict in respect of count 20.']