R v McKittrick

The case of R v McKittrick involves an appeal against the conviction of the appellant for cultivating not less than a commercial quantity of a narcotic plant. The case was heard in the appellate court, which was required to review the decisions made in the trial court. The appellant was convicted on count 1 of cultivating not less than a commercial quantity of a narcotic plant, along with alternative counts of cultivating a narcotic plant, possession of a drug of dependence, and dishonestly handling stolen goods.

The legal issues the court was required to decide included whether the trial judge erred in the directions given to the jury regarding the required mens rea for the offence of cultivating not less than a commercial quantity of a narcotic plant. The Crown conceded that the trial judge had indeed erred in this regard. The court also had to consider whether the conviction on count 1 should be quashed and whether a verdict of guilty on the alternative count of cultivating a narcotic plant should be substituted. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate sentence for the remaining counts.

The appellate court found that the trial judge had indeed erred in the directions given to the jury regarding the required mens rea. The court quashed the conviction on count 1 and substituted a verdict of guilty on the alternative count of cultivating a narcotic plant. The court then proceeded to re-sentence the appellant on the remaining counts, resulting in a total effective sentence of one year’s imprisonment, with all but 180 days of the sentence to be suspended for two years. The appeal against conviction on count 1 was allowed, and the substituted verdict and re-sentencing were upheld by the court.