The respondent was a passenger in a stolen car and was charged with possession of stolen goods.
The trial judge disbelieved the respondent's testimony that he did not know the car was stolen and convicted him.
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction, holding that some evidence of control was necessary to establish possession under the Criminal Code.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, confirming that a measure of control is a constituent and essential element of possession under the Code.
