In R v Martindale [1986] 84 Cr App R 31 the accused claimed lack of possession due to forgetfulness. He'd been charged with possession of drugs under UK law. He said that he had been given cannabis while in Canada, had put it in his wallet and forgotten it was there before returning to England …
Tag: possession
Punishable by imprisonment
A person who commits an offence punishable by imprisonment during the operational period of a suspended sentence is at risk of having that suspended sentence restored: s 31 Sentencing Act 1991.(I say 'at risk' because the meaning applied to exceptional circumstances that make it unjust to restore a suspended sentence can vary widely: see R …
Possession related to trafficking
Edit: It's generally considered mitigatory when possession of drugs is not for the purposes of trafficking (though, strictly speaking, this ought properly to be considered the absence of aggravation). There's no firm rule as to how much of a drug of dependence is too much to be considered intended for personal use. In Hanks v …
R v Dang & Dang: the harm that drugs may cause
Pidoto v O'Dea (2006) 14 VR 269 established that the type of drug of dependence involved is an irrelevant consideration in sentencing. It's not possible to classify one substance in that category as being more or less 'harmful' than another. The same point went to the High Court in R v Adams in 2008. In …
Continue reading R v Dang & Dang: the harm that drugs may cause
R v Dang & Dang: the harm that drugs may cause
Pidoto v O'Dea (2006) 14 VR 269 established that the type of drug of dependence involved is an irrelevant consideration in sentencing. It's not possible to classify one substance in that category as being more or less 'harmful' than another. The same point went to the High Court in R v Adams in 2008. In …
Continue reading R v Dang & Dang: the harm that drugs may cause