R. v. Navales

R. v. Navales

On the evidence the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, as sole resident and participant in the stash house operation, had knowledge and control of the drugs in the living room and bedroom and therefore was guilty of possession for the purpose of trafficking (counts 1-3); however the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge and control of the contents of the locked gun safe in the storage closet (no key, no forensic link, plausible access by others), so the firearm/ammunition count (count 4) was not proven.

Citation
2014 BCSC 348
Parties
Prosecution: Regina (Crown); Accused: Eric John Navales
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking; Unauthorized Possession of Prohibited Firearm / Trial Reasons for Judgment (conviction/acquittal)
Outcome
Accused convicted on counts 1, 2 and 3 (possession for purpose of trafficking); not guilty on count 4 (possession of prohibited firearm/ammunition not proven)
Legal Topics
Possession, Constructive Possession, Joint Possession, Trafficking, Stash House Operations, Expert Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Firearms Law Evidence Possession Constructive Possession Joint Possession Trafficking +3 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecution

Eric John Navales

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession for Purpose of Trafficking; Unauthorized Possession of Prohibited Firearm / Trial Reasons for Judgment (conviction/acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused had knowledge and control constituting possession of drugs found in apartment
  2. 2 Whether accused had knowledge and control constituting possession of firearm and ammunition found in locked gun safe
  3. 3 Whether constructive or joint possession could be inferred from occupancy and surrounding circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, as sole resident and participant in the stash house operation, had knowledge and control of the drugs in the living room and bedroom and therefore was guilty of possession for the purpose of trafficking (counts 1-3); however the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge and control of the contents of the locked gun safe in the storage closet (no key, no forensic link, plausible access by others), so the firearm/ammunition count (count 4) was not proven.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on counts 1, 2 and 3 (possession for purpose of trafficking); not guilty on count 4 (possession of prohibited firearm/ammunition not proven)

Orders

  • Counts 1-3: guilty (findings of possession for purpose of trafficking)
  • Count 4: acquitted (Crown failed to prove possession of gun safe contents beyond reasonable doubt)