R. v. Camacho

R. v. Camacho

On the specific facts the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Camacho had knowledge of and control over the grow operation in the adjoining unit because he was the sole tenant of both units, lived and worked in Unit 5743, was regularly present, access to the grow was disguised but regularly only via Unit 5743 and the operation required daily tending; therefore he was guilty of production and possession for the purpose of trafficking. The Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he fraudulently obtained electricity because there was no evidence as to when bypasses were installed, no evidence he had access to the remote meter room, and no firm basis to infer knowledge of...

Citation
2011 BCSC 1813
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Richard Patrick Camacho
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Found guilty of production of marihuana (s.7(1) Controlled Drugs and Substances Act) and possession of more than three kilograms for the purpose of trafficking (s.5(2) CDSA); acquitted of fraudulently obtaining electricity (s.326(1)(a) Criminal Code).
Legal Topics
Possession (constructive), Production of Marihuana, Trafficking, Knowledge and Control, Circumstantial Evidence, Electricity Fraud
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Criminal Code Fraud Possession (constructive) Production of Marihuana Trafficking Knowledge and Control Circumstantial Evidence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Richard Patrick Camacho

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge of and control over the marihuana grow operation (constructive possession)
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved fraudulently consuming electricity contrary to s.326(1)(a) of the Criminal Code

Ratio Decidendi

On the specific facts the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Camacho had knowledge of and control over the grow operation in the adjoining unit because he was the sole tenant of both units, lived and worked in Unit 5743, was regularly present, access to the grow was disguised but regularly only via Unit 5743 and the operation required daily tending; therefore he was guilty of production and possession for the purpose of trafficking. The Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he fraudulently obtained electricity because there was no evidence as to when bypasses were installed, no evidence he had access to the remote meter room, and no firm basis to infer knowledge of...

Court Disposition

Found guilty of production of marihuana (s.7(1) Controlled Drugs and Substances Act) and possession of more than three kilograms for the purpose of trafficking (s.5(2) CDSA); acquitted of fraudulently obtaining electricity (s.326(1)(a) Criminal Code).

Orders

  • Convicted on Counts 1 and 2: production and possession for the purpose of trafficking.
  • Acquitted on Count 3: fraudulently obtaining electricity pursuant to s.326(1)(a) Criminal Code.