Summary

Keywords

Criminal law — Appeal — Sufficiency of reasons — Whether there was a miscarriage of justice — Does an intermediate appellate court have the duty to address all grounds of appeal advanced by an appellant and provide sufficiently intelligible reasons for judgment? — Absent an application to re-open its case, can the Crown argue the admissibility of evidence in final argument?

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.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) (CERTAIN INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC)

The victim was killed and his common law spouse was injured as they left their apartment building. They were shot by two assailants. The police identified a van and commenced a police chase during which shots were fired from the van at the police. The van was found a short time later. A police dog tracked the applicant from the van to a nearby school, where a black bag was found containing two handguns. The applicant’s DNA was on the handguns, and his hands tested positive for gun powder residue. The guns were confirmed to be those involved in the death of the victim and in the shots fired during the police pursuit. There was a photo lineup identification and the spouse made a tentative identification of the applicant. At trial, however, the spouse claimed not to remember the lineup, said that she was drugged, and she would not confirm the identification she had made. The trial judge concluded that the photo lineup identification was admissible under the principled exception to the hearsay rule. The applicant was convicted of first degree murder, aggravated assault, and discharge of a firearm with intent. The conviction appeals were dismissed.

Lower Court Rulings