Abstract
When the police searched the appellant's premises, they found a large quantity of cocaine, together with sets of scales. He was charged with possession of a Class A drug, cocaine, with intent to supply, but he argued that as he thought it was 'speed' (that is, amphetamine), he could not have had the intention of supplying cocaine. The recorder ruled that, even if his belief were in fact held as an honestly mistaken belief as to which controlled drug he possessed, that would not be a defence to the charge. He was convicted as charged but he appealed on the ground that the ruling was erroneous and had had the effect of depriving him of the opportunity of putting his defence before the jury.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 449- 451 |
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | The Journal of Criminal Law |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2000 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Possession of a Controlled Drug with Intent to Supply a Different Controlled Drug: R v Leeson [2000] 1 Cr App R 233'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver