Case Law

Question 1

Saxton V Police

Answer 1

Importing

Question 2

R v Hancox

Answer 2

Importing is a process

Question 3

R v Strawbridge

Answer 3

Guilty Knowledge

Question 4

Police v Emirali

Answer 4

Useable amount

Question 5

R v Rua

Answer 5

Produce & Manufacture

Question 6

R v Maginnis

Answer 6

Supply and enable use

Question 7

R v During

Answer 7

Supply on request

Question 8

R v Brown

Answer 8

Genuine offer

4 examples of offer

Question 9

R v Forrest and Forrest

Answer 9

Proof of age

Question 10

R v Cox

Answer 10

two elements of possession

Question 11

R v Mcginty

Answer 11

Warrant application - exhausted alternative investigation techniques.

Question 12

Saxton v Police

Answer 12

To import includes ‘to introduce from abroad or to cause to be brought in from a foreign country’

Question 13

R v Hancox

Answer 13

’. . . the bringing of goods into the country or causing them to be brought into the country does not cease as the aircraft or vessel enters New Zealand’s territorial limits. Importing into NZ for the purpose of s 6(1)(a) is a process. The element of importing exists from the time the goods enter NZ until they reach their immediate destination . . . [ie] when they have ceased to be under the control of the appropriate authorities and have become available to the consignee or addressee’

Question 14

R v Strawbridge

Answer 14

It is not necessary for the Crown to establish knowledge on the part of the accused. In the absence of evidence to the contrary knowledge on her part will be presumed, but if there is some evidence the accused honestly believed on reasonable grounds that her act was innocent, then she is entitled to be acquitted unless the jury is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that this was not so.

Question 15

Police v Emirali

Answer 15

‘… The serious offence of . . possessing a narcotic does not extend to some minute and useless residue of the substance’

Question 16

R v Rua

Answer 16

The word ‘Produce’ & ‘Manufacture’ in S6(1)(b) broadly cover the creation of controlled drugs by some form of process which changes the original substances into a particular controlled drug.

Question 17

R v Maginnis

Answer 17

‘[Supply involves] more than the mere transfer of physical control . . . [it includes] enabling the recipient to apply the thing . . to purposes for which he desires. . . ‘

Question 18

R v During

Answer 18

‘[An offer is] an intimation by the person charged to another that he is ready on request to supply to that other drugs of a kind prohibited by the statute.’

Question 19

R v Brown

Answer 19

The Defendant is guilty in the following circumstances

• Offers to supply a drug that he has on hand
• Offers to supply a drug that will be produced at some future date
• Offers to supply a drug that he mistakenly believes he can supply
• Offers to supply a drug deceitfully, knowing he will not supply that drug

’. . . the making if such an intimation, with the intention that it should be understood as a genuine offer, is an offence’

Question 20

R v Forrest and Forrest

Answer 20

The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of [the Victims] age

Question 21

R v Cox

Answer 21

Possession involves two elements. The first, the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, the mental element, is a combination of knowledge and intention: knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused that the substance is in his possession; and an intention to exercise possession.

Question 22

R v McGinty

Answer 22

The evidence in the present case of continued heroin dealing, in respect of which the orthodox techniques such as searching premises and following vehicles had been tried without success, was sufficient. A Judge was not required to refuse a warrant because the Police had not exhausted every conceivable alternative technique of investigation.