R v Sukkasem

The appellant was charged with possession of a commercial quantity of a dangerous drug for the purpose of supply, and possession of proceeds of crime. The respondent applied to limit evidence of the cash found at the appellant’s premises to only the count of possession of proceeds of crime, and to exclude evidence in relation to the drug possession charge. The appellant argued that evidence of the cash would be unfairly prejudicial, as it would unfairly prejudice the appellant by leading the jury to believe that the appellant was guilty of drug trafficking, when it was only relevant to the possession of proceeds of crime charge. The court had to determine whether the prejudicial effect of the evidence outweighed its probative value. The court found that the evidence was highly relevant to the proceeds of crime charge and had significant probative value. The court further found that the prejudicial effect of the evidence was not such as to make its admission unfair, as the jury would be directed to consider the evidence in relation to the proceeds of crime charge only. The application was dismissed. The court ordered that the evidence of the cash found at the appellant’s premises be admitted in relation to both counts.