R v. Chevrefils

R v. Chevrefils

Judge found beyond reasonable doubt that Chevrefils had constructive/joint possession and intent to traffic because he had knowledge of the cocaine, a right to possess/control it, consented to it remaining on the vessel, purchased bags, rented the vehicle used to transport the captain, and transferred money; however the Crown failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Chevrefils participated in bringing the cocaine into Canada or agreed to the importation prior to the goods entering Canadian waters/docking, so he was convicted on possession for purpose of trafficking (count 1) and acquitted on conspiracy to import (count 2) and importing (count 3).

Citation
2018 NSPC 60
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Luc Chevrefils
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Decision (provincial Court Ruling)
Outcome
Count 1 (possession for purpose of trafficking) - Guilty; Count 2 (conspiracy to import) - Not guilty; Count 3 (importing) - Not guilty
Legal Topics
Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking, Constructive and Joint Possession, Importation, Conspiracy to Import, Hearsay Co Conspirator Exception, Principled Exception to Hearsay, When Importation Completes
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Controlled Substances Law Evidence Law Conspiracy Law Maritime Importation Law Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking Constructive and Joint Possession Importation +4 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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Luc Chevrefils

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Decision (provincial Court Ruling)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused had requisite control to establish constructive or joint possession rather than attempt
  2. 2 When the offence of importing is complete for sea-borne contraband (entry into Canada)
  3. 3 Whether accused was a member of a conspiracy to import cocaine

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found beyond reasonable doubt that Chevrefils had constructive/joint possession and intent to traffic because he had knowledge of the cocaine, a right to possess/control it, consented to it remaining on the vessel, purchased bags, rented the vehicle used to transport the captain, and transferred money; however the Crown failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Chevrefils participated in bringing the cocaine into Canada or agreed to the importation prior to the goods entering Canadian waters/docking, so he was convicted on possession for purpose of trafficking (count 1) and acquitted on conspiracy to import (count 2) and importing (count 3).

Court Disposition

Count 1 (possession for purpose of trafficking) - Guilty; Count 2 (conspiracy to import) - Not guilty; Count 3 (importing) - Not guilty