FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 2,314 times | Saved to 335 briefcases
R v Pham (2005), 77 OR (3d) 401. (Link)


Pham was not present in her apartment, when the police entered and found cocaine. There was no evidence of actual possession, since Pham was not home.


Does possession under s.4(3) of the Criminal Code require actual possession?


In the case of s.4(3) of the Criminal Code, actual possession is not required -- inferred knowledge can lead to a finding of constructive possession.


Facts were sufficient to infer knowledge of the drugs: Drugs were found around her own toiletries and her bedroom; Drugs were in plain view; No evidence of men’s toiletries.


Decision in favour of Crown (R).

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.