136 This argument proceeded before us on the footing that the verdict of the jury could not be supported by the evidence, and that it should therefore be set aside under s. 686(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code. I have already expressed my view that there was evidence upon which a properly instructed jury acting judicially could reasonably have convicted Light of possession for the purpose of trafficking. That is the test applicable under s. 686(1)(a)(i); Regina v. Yebes, 1987 CanLII 17 (SCC), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 168. It is a distinctly different test from that required to be met under s. 686(1)(b)(iii), but it is sufficient to dispose of this ground of appeal. IV
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.