R. v. Howell

R. v. Howell

On the totality of the evidence the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, as owner and driver of the vehicle, knew of and consented to the presence of methamphetamine and had a measure of control over it, and the quantity, scale, baggies and cash supported the only reasonable inference that the drugs were possessed for the purpose of trafficking; accused guilty as charged.

Citation
2014 BCSC 2290
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Mark William Howell
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking (s.5(2) Cdsa) / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Guilty as charged
Legal Topics
Possession, Constructive Possession, Joint Possession, Trafficking, Circumstantial Evidence, Knowledge Consent Control
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Evidence Search and Seizure Possession Constructive Possession Joint Possession Trafficking +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Mark William Howell

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking (s.5(2) Cdsa) / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had possession (actual or constructive) of methamphetamine found in his vehicle
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt knowledge, consent and a measure of control over the drugs
  3. 3 Whether the drugs were possessed for the purpose of trafficking

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the evidence the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, as owner and driver of the vehicle, knew of and consented to the presence of methamphetamine and had a measure of control over it, and the quantity, scale, baggies and cash supported the only reasonable inference that the drugs were possessed for the purpose of trafficking; accused guilty as charged.

Court Disposition

Guilty as charged