Summary

Keywords

None.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Criminal law - Reasonable verdict - Whether, given the frailties of the circumstantial evidence, the guilty verdict was one that a properly instructed jury, acting judicially, could properly have rendered.

The appellant was convicted of robbery with a firearm, unlawful confinement, disguise with intent to commit an indictable offence, and possession of a weapon for the purpose of committing an indictable offence. At trial, identity was the central issue. Neither victim of the home invasion could identify the appellant. The Crown’s case rested on circumstantial evidence. The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing, among other things, that the verdict was unreasonable. A majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Pepall, J.A., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and entered acquittals on all charges. In her view, the Crown’s evidence, which amounted to inconclusive DNA evidence coupled with a baton found in the appellant’s residence which could not be connected to the crime scene, could not support a conclusion that the appellant was the perpetrator of the crimes.

Lower Court Rulings