Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Sidori Francis v. R., Crim. App. 317-D-68, 17/7/68, Biron J.



Sidori Francis v. R., Crim. App. 317-D-68, 17/7/68, Biron J.

Accused was convicted of conveying property (a radio) reasonably suspected of having been stolen or unlawfully obtained. After testifying in his own behalf, he refused to answer questions put to him during cross-examination. Thereupon, the trial court also convicted accused of contempt of court. (P.C. s. 114(1)(b)). He only appealed the main conviction, which appeal was dismissed, but the High Court, sua sponte, considered the conviction for contempt of court. Accused said that he had a licence for the radio, but that he had lost it. The trial court had asked him where it was, and ordered him to produce it, which accused failed to do.

            Held: (1) Section 114(1)(b) makes it an offence, inter alea, for a sworn witness (as accused was ) to refuse to answer a question or produce a document. Since the court believed that accused was not properly in possession of the radio, he hardly would be able to produce a licence for it, so the failure to do so cannot constitute contempt of court. Conviction quashed. (2) The Court made note of the fact that accused could have, had he so chosen, refused to give any evidence at all. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments