R. v. Forward

R. v. Forward

On the evidence as a whole the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused constructively possessed the seized substances, knew they were controlled substances, and possessed them for the purpose of trafficking — based on eight identifiable fingerprints of the accused on the garbage bag containing the drugs found in the dryer in his residence, uninterrupted continuity of exhibits and analyst reports confirming quantities, and expert opinion that the quantities and associated paraphernalia were consistent with street-level trafficking rather than personal use.

Citation
2017 NSSC 109
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Wayne Derek Daniel Forward
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Trial Verdict
Outcome
Accused found guilty on all three counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking (cocaine, MDMA, cannabis marihuana)
Legal Topics
Possession for Purpose of Trafficking, Constructive Possession, Search Warrant/ito Validity, Fingerprint Identification, Expert Opinion Admissibility, Chain of Custody, Charter Motions
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Possession for Purpose of Trafficking Constructive Possession Search Warrant/ito Validity Fingerprint Identification Expert Opinion Admissibility +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Wayne Derek Daniel Forward

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Trial Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had constructive possession of the seized substances
  2. 2 Whether the accused knew the seized substances were controlled substances
  3. 3 Whether the possession was for the purpose of trafficking

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence as a whole the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused constructively possessed the seized substances, knew they were controlled substances, and possessed them for the purpose of trafficking — based on eight identifiable fingerprints of the accused on the garbage bag containing the drugs found in the dryer in his residence, uninterrupted continuity of exhibits and analyst reports confirming quantities, and expert opinion that the quantities and associated paraphernalia were consistent with street-level trafficking rather than personal use.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty on all three counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking (cocaine, MDMA, cannabis marihuana)

Orders

  • Accused convicted on counts 1-3 of the Indictment for possession of a controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking