Mena v Young

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Court: Supreme Court (Belize)
• Judge: Barrington-Jones, J.
• Judgment Date: 30 March 1981
• Docket Number: Appeal No. 1 of 1981
• Date: 30 March 1981

Supreme Court

Barrington-Jones, J.

Appeal No. 1 of 1981

Mena

and

Young

Mr.P.Zuniga for the appellant

Mr. G. Quallo for the respondent

Practice and procedure - Appeal against conviction and sentence — Receiving contrary to Section 177(1) of the Criminal Code — Mens rea — Whether it needed to be shown that the appellant “knew or ought to have known that the goods were stolen” — Finding that the magistrate had misconceived the requirements of Section 177(1)(a) of the Code — Finding that the magistrate failed to address his mind to the doctrine of recent possession and accordingly the conviction was unsafe and unsatisfactory — Appeal allowed — Conviction quashed — Sentence set aside — Retrial ordered.

Barrington-Jones, J.

1 The appellant was convicted of receiving contrary to section 177 (1)(a) of the Criminal Code by the magistrate for the Stann Creek Judicial District on the 5th December, 1980. An appeal was filed on the 20th January, 1981 reciting the following grounds:–

• (1) The decision was based on a wrong principle in that the magistrate misdirected himself in holding that the duty of the prosecution was to satisfy the court that the defendant received the articles in question “in such circumstances that he knew or ought to have known that they were stolen”;

• (2) The decision could not be supported having regard to the evidence;

• (3) The decision was such that the Inferior Court viewing the circumstances reasonably could not have so decided.

2 In regard to ground (1) Mr. Zuniga complained that the learned magistrate had fallen into error in his reasons for decision where he had stated: “that he in the alternative received these articles in such circumstances that he knew or ought to have known that they were stolen.” Mr. Zuniga drew the court's attention to the wording of Section 177 (1) of the Criminal Code and submitted that the learned magistrate in using phrase “or ought to have...