SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Between:
Kim Thi Pham
Appellant
and
Her Majesty The Queen
Respondent
Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Deschamps, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
Reasons for judgment: (para. 1)
McLachlin C.J. (Deschamps, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ. concurring)
R. v. Pham, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 940, 2006 SCC 26
Kim Thi Pham Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Pham
Neutral citation: 2006 SCC 26.
2006: June 21.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Deschamps, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario
Narcotics — Possession for purpose of trafficking — Constructive possession.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (McMurtry C.J.O. and Blair J.A. and Kozak J. (ad hoc)) (2005), 2005 ONCA 44671, 77 O.R. (3d) 401, 204 O.A.C. 299, 203 C.C.C. (3d) 326, 36 C.R. (6th) 200, [2005] O.J. No. 5127 (QL), affirming the accused’s conviction for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. Appeal dismissed.
Craig Parry, for the appellant.
James C. Martin, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
1The Chief Justice — We are all of the view that this appeal should be dismissed for the reasons of the majority of the Court of Appeal for Ontario.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Craig Parry, Kitchener.
Solicitor for the respondent: Attorney General of Canada, Halifax.
