Chapter 2 - Firearms Flashcards
Hepi v R [2010] NZCA 503; s66
Police executed a SW at an address in Te Kutit which was the residential property of Hepi and Heta. Police found 200 cannabis plants, 1.6kg dried material and in a caravan a .22 semi-auto rifle and ammo. No one was home during the execution of the warrant but there was signs of being inhabited.
Hepi v R - On what grounds were the convictions quashed for unlawful possession of a firearm on premises owned by the defendant?
The DC misdirected the jury on the meaning of possession and occupancy. The crown had to prove Hepi and Heta was in occupation of the Te Kuiti address. The presumption could be rebutted by Hepi and Heta proving on the balance of probabilities that the firearm was not his/her property and was in the possession of some other person.
Under s40 Arms Act if a person in possession of a firearm or restricted weapon refused to their details, is a warrant required to arrest them? What is the possible penalty for the non-compliant person?
May caution that person, if they persist to refuse or fail or continue to fail to provide particulars you may arrest without a warrant.
Penalty 3 months imprison, $1000 Fine
Under s66 if you apprehend a driver who has a firearm in their car which they claim belongs to someone else what is the effect of s66 of the Arms Act 1983?
Be deemed to be in possession of that firearm, airgun, imitation firearm, restricted weapon or explosive unless he proves that it was not his property and that it was the possession of some other person
s66 operates as a ‘deeming’ provision, whereby an alleged offender can be deemed to be in possession of arms/ammunition if proven that the alleged offender was in occupation of the relevant property. What is Defence to this?
On the balance of probabilities that the arms/ammunition was in the possession of someone else, not the alleged offender(s).
