DAVIES v REGINA [2007] NSWCCA 316

DAVIES v REGINA [2007] NSWCCA 316

On the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant possessed the heroin in the locked blue box. The evidence linking the appellant to the box and its contents was sufficient, and the evidence suggesting alternative ownership or control did not require the jury to have a reasonable doubt. The verdict was therefore not unreasonable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'drug Offence' 'supply of Heroin' 'possession of Prohibited Substance' 'presumption of Supply' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'drug Offence' 'supply of Heroin' 'possession of Prohibited Substance' 'presumption of Supply' 'unreasonable Verdict' '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

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdict of guilty was unreasonable having regard to the evidence.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant possessed the heroin found in the locked blue box.' 'Whether the circumstantial evidence excluded a reasonable doubt arising from possible possession or ownership of the heroin by other persons.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant possessed the heroin in the locked blue box. The evidence linking the appellant to the box and its contents was sufficient, and the evidence suggesting alternative ownership or control did not require the jury to have a reasonable doubt. The verdict was therefore not unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed']