In Ungaro v. The King, 1950 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1950] S.C.R. 430 at 431, 9 C.R. 328, 96 C.C.C. 245, [1950] 2 D.L.R. 593, it is stated: "If the trial judge does not believe the accused the result is that no explanation at all is left, and the case would have to be decided on the well-known principle that possession of recently stolen property is circumstantial evidence of guilt."
"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.