R. v. Von Innerebner (A.M.A.), (2000) 273 A.R. 241 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Allen, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: August 31, 2000
• Citations: (2000), 273 A.R. 241 (ProvCt);2000 ABPC 140

R. v. Von Innerebner (A.M.A.) (2000), 273 A.R. 241 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. SE.064

Her Majesty the Queen v. Adan Mark Anthony Von Innerebner

(81612558P10101; 2000 ABPC 140)

Indexed As: R. v. Von Innerebner (A.M.A.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Allen, P.C.J.

August 31, 2000.

Summary:

The accused was found in the driver's seat of a stolen vehicle. He was charged with possession of a stolen motor vehicle exceed­ing $5000. The main issue at trial was whether the accused knew the vehicle to be stolen, as required by s. 354(1) of the Crimi­nal Code.

The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused guilty.

Criminal Law - Topic 1870

Offences against property - Possession of stolen goods - Evidence and proof - Proof of guilty knowledge - The accused was found in the driver's seat of a vehicle reported stolen three days earlier - The ignition and steering column were dam­aged in a way which permitted the oper­ation of the vehicle with a pocket knife instead of a key - A suitable pocket knife was found - The accused was charged with possession of a stolen motor vehicle - The main issue at trial was whether the accused knew the vehicle to be stolen, as required by s. 354(1) of the Criminal Code - The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused guilty - The court held that it was appro­priate in these circumstances to apply the doctrine of possession of recently stolen property and infer that the accused had the required knowledge - See paragraphs 3 to 11 and 56 to 58.

Criminal Law - Topic 1881

Offences against property - Doctrine of recent possession - Application of doctrine - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1870 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Belanger (1972), 6 C.C.C.(2d) 210 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Gillis (1977), 20 N.S.R.(2d) 361; 27 A.R. 361; 35 C.C.C.(2d) 419 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Beaver v. R., [1957] S.C.R. 531, refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Terrence (1980), 47 N.R. 13; 55 C.C.C.(2d) 183 (Ont. C.A.), affd. [1983] 1 S.C.R. 357; 47 N.R. 8; 4 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Killam (1973), 12 C.C.C.(2d) 115 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Kowlyk, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 59; 86 N.R. 195; 55 Man.R.(2d) 1; 43 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Graham et al. (1954), 108 C.C.C. 153 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Richler (1939), 72 C.C.C. 399 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Langmead (1864), Le & Ca. 427; 169 E.R. 1459, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. L'Heureux, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 159; 60 N.R. 396; 21 D.L.R.(4th) 637, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Tremblay, [1969] S.C.R. 431, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Proudlock, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 525; 24 N.R. 199; 43 C.C.C.(2d) 321, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Blondin (1970), 2 C.C.C.(2d) 118 (B.C.C.A.), affd. (1972), 4 C.C.C.(2d) 566 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Wretham (1971), 16 C.R.N.S. 124 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Currie (1975), 24 C.C.C.(2d) 292 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. McFall (1975), 26 C.C.C.(2d) 181 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Aiello (1978), 30 N.R. 559; 38 C.C.C.(2d) 485 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Sansregret, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 570; 58 N.R. 123; 35 Man.R.(2d) 1; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 223, refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Jorgensen (R.) et al., [1995] 4 S.C.R. 55; 189 N.R. 1; 87 O.A.C. 1; 102 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Osolin, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 595; 162 N.R. 1; 38 B.C.A.C. 81; 62 W.A.C. 81; 109 D.L.R.(4th) 478, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Park (D.G.), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 836; 183 N.R. 81; 169 A.R. 241; 97 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Esau (A.J.), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 777; 214 N.R. 241; 116 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Ewanchuk (S.B.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 330; 235 N.R. 323; 232 A.R. 1; 195 W.A.C. 1; 131 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Hinchey (M.F.) and Hinchey (B.A.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 1128; 205 N.R. 161; 147 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 459 A.P.R. 1, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Tutton and Tutton, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1392; 98 N.R. 19; 35 O.A.C. 1; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 129; 13 M.V.R.(2d) 161; 69 C.R.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Waite, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1436; 98 N.R. 69; 35 O.A.C. 51; 13 M.V.R.(2d) 236; 69 C.R.(3d) 323; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Hundal (S.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 867; 149 N.R. 189; 22 B.C.A.C. 241; 38 W.A.C. 241; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 19 C.R.(4th) 169; 14 C.R.R.(2d) 19; 43 M.V.R.(2d) 169, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Souter (D.N.) (1999), 228 A.R. 54; 188 W.A.C. 54 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 53].

Authors and Works Noticed:

McWilliams, Peter K., Canadian Criminal Evidence (3rd Ed. 1988), p. 5-11 [para. 21].

Williams, Glanville, Criminal Law: The General Part (2nd Ed. 1961), pp. 157 [paras. 40, 41]; 158, 160 [para. 40]; 159 [para. 42].

Counsel:

M. Collinson, for the Crown;

E. Erler, for the accused.

This case was heard by Allen, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on August 31, 2000.