R. v. Menzies

R. v. Menzies

The stop, plain view observation and subsequent arrest were lawful; the quantity and variety of drugs, cash in street-denominations, and distribution paraphernalia supported expert evidence that the substances were possessed for the purpose of trafficking; the accused's explanations were not credible and did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 BCSC 389
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Helen Marguerite Menzies
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Criminal Trial Judgment (conviction)
Outcome
Accused found guilty as charged on all three counts (possession for the purpose of trafficking).
Legal Topics
Possession for Purpose of Trafficking, Trafficking Definition, Search Incidental to Arrest, Obstruction of a Police Officer, Expert Opinion on Drug Trafficking
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Drug Offences Search and Seizure Evidence Motor Vehicle Law Possession for Purpose of Trafficking Trafficking Definition Search Incidental to Arrest +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Helen Marguerite Menzies

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Criminal Trial Judgment (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the initial traffic stop, arrest and subsequent search were lawful and evidence admissible
  2. 2 Whether the quantities, variety and paraphernalia indicated possession for the purpose of trafficking rather than personal use
  3. 3 Credibility and reliability of the accused's evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The stop, plain view observation and subsequent arrest were lawful; the quantity and variety of drugs, cash in street-denominations, and distribution paraphernalia supported expert evidence that the substances were possessed for the purpose of trafficking; the accused's explanations were not credible and did not raise a reasonable doubt; therefore guilty on all counts.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty as charged on all three counts (possession for the purpose of trafficking).

Orders

  • Accused convicted on all three counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking.