Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Saidi Meke v. R., Crim. App. 850-D-66; 11/1/67; Biron, J.



Saidi Meke v. R., Crim. App. 850-D-66; 11/1/67; Biron, J.

Accused was convicted of receiving stolen goods and of stealing from a motor vehicle.

            Held: (1) Mens Rea in the crime of receiving stolen goods may properly be inferred from the accused ’s possession of the goods and from his concealment of some, though not all, of the goods stolen in an established theft or burglary. (2) Under the doctrine of recent possession, a person found in possession of stolen goods may be rebuttably presumed to have stolen them and may be convicted either of receiving, or stealing or, in appropriate case, of housebreaking. (3) Under the Minimum Sentences Act of 1963, an accused may be given the scheduled sentence for receiving stolen goods if he knew or should have known that the goods had been feloniously taken. He need not have known that they were taken n the course of an offense set out in Part 1 of the schedule to the act. Citing, reluctantly, R. v. Mohamed Naweki, (1964) E.A. 353.

 

Post a Comment

0 Comments