The conduct of the accused in this case is possession of marijuana for the purposes of trafficking. It is an activity which does not convey or attempt to convey a meaning and thus it has no content of expression and does not attract this particular freedom. The accused has not conveyed nor did he attempt to convey any meaning by his conduct. He simply wished to traffic quantities of marijuana and be compensated for it. Thus this particular freedom is of no assistance to the accused. See also Rosen v. Ontario (Attorney General) [1996] OJ No. 100 leave to appeal to SC of C denied [1996] SCCA 127.
"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.