The defendant was the only one of several defendants convicted of involvement in a drugs case. He appealed a confiscation order under which he carried the entire weight of the confiscation order.
Held: The order was correct provided that the court could assess the value to be attributed to the proceeds of drug trafficking, and that the defendant had had a sufficient degree of control. The words ‘realisable property’ in the Act included also property which had been acquired legitimately, and therefore such property could be included in the calculations.
Citations:
[1991] 1 WLR 1385, Times 14-Mar-1991
Statutes:
Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 5(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Levin CACD 29-Jan-2004
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, challenging the standard of proof applied by the judge.
Held: The judge was entitled to include in his consideration, the evidence given at the trial as well as that on the confiscation . .
Cited – May, Regina v HL 14-May-2008
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.193767
