Case Law - Explained Flashcards
Saxton v Police (1981) - What happened?
Defendant posted parcel from London to Dunedin. Parcel intercepted by Customs and Defendant charged for importing. Argued that he exported the drugs from London but did not import them into NZ as he didnt bring it in, himself. Court of Appeal held “to import” includes “to bring in” but that the term also has a wider definition.
R v Hancox (1989) - What happened?
MDMA tablets were mailed were mailed from overseas to a post office in Auckland. Defendant arrested when she went to uplift on of the parcels, claiming she went to clear the box and deliver to the addressee. Court of Appeal found that the delivery into the post office box was the final step in the transit process and the importation had ended. Defendant’s involvement after that point could therefore not have aided or assisted in the importation.
(However, the Court acknowledged, that the Defendant could not be convicted for importation, but maybe liable for other drug offences such as possession for supply)
R v Strawbridge (1970) - What happened?
The Defendant was convicted of cultivating a prohibited plant, claiming on appeal that she had not known the plants were cannabis. Court Appeal ordered a re-trial, holding that the offence is not absolute and that mens rea is an essential element.
Police v Emirali (1976) - What happened?
The Defendant was charged following a SW at his address in which minute of cannabis were found. The Court of Appeal held that the purpose of the statute is not to prohibit the existence
R v Rua (2008) - What happened?
The Defendant was charged with manufacturing Meth after Police located a Clan Lab at his address. Court of Appeal reviewed Section 6(1)(b) and held that it does not create 2 separate & distinct crimes - the words “producing and manufacturing” are to be read as complementary.
R v Maginnis (1987) - What happened?
The Defendant was charged with “Possession of Cannabis resin with intent to supply it to another” after a package containing 227g found in his car. Claiming the package had been left there by a friend and that he expected his friend woudl at some stage come and collect the drugs from him.
House of Lords held that return of drugs would have restored friends ability to use drugs for his own purpose and the Defendant therefore had the necessary intent for supply.
R v Brown (1978) - What happened?
The Defendant was charged with supplying undercover cop LSD tabs. Tabs analyzed and found that it was another substance, not LSD, not a controlled drug. Court of appeal found that the offence of offering to supply can arise in a variety of ways.
R v Forrest v Forrest (1970) - What happened?
Two men charged with having sexual intercourse with a 14 year old girl who ran away from Child Welfare. At trial, girl provided her BC and gave evidence that she was the person on the BC. Men appealed the conviction on the ground that the Crown had not adequately proved the girls age.
R v Cox (1990) - What happened?
Man was convicted of sexual violation for having sex/oral sex with young girl for 3years starting at 10years. He defence was that she had consented.
Court of Appeal found that due to age/maturity/understand the significance of the act - be in a position to make an rational or informed decision.
R v McGinty (1983) - What happened?
Held that a Judge is not required to refuse to issue a warrant merely because Police have not exhausted every conceivable alternative investigation technique.
