In a judge-alone criminal trial, the accused pleaded guilty to simple possession of crack cocaine but contested the allegation that the drugs were possessed for the purpose of trafficking.
The Crown sought to rely on a police expert to establish that the quantity seized was inconsistent with personal use, despite the absence of common trafficking indicia such as packaging materials, scales, debt lists, or significant cash.
Applying the Mohan and Abbey admissibility principles, the court held that the proposed opinion evidence, even taken at its highest, could not eliminate the reasonable inference of personal use and risked shifting the burden of proof.
The Crown therefore failed to prove the purpose element beyond a reasonable doubt.
The trafficking charge was dismissed and a conviction was entered only on the included offence of simple possession.
