Case information

Criminal law – Sexual assault – Unreasonable verdict – Whether Court of Appeal erred in law by failing to exhaust its appellate jurisdiction in finding that verdict was not unreasonable without speaking to questions of law raised by applicant that would lead to order for new trial – Whether Quebec Court of Appeal erred in law in its analysis on issue of unreasonable verdict.

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) (PUBLICATION BAN ON PARTY) (COURT FILE CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY THE PUBLIC)

The applicant was convicted of sexual assault. At the time of the events, both the applicant and the complainant were minors. The Crown’s theory of the case was that the complainant was spending the night at the applicant’s home and that while she was sleeping, the applicant indulged in sexual relations involving vaginal penetration from behind her without her consent. In his appeal, the applicant submitted that the trial judge had made errors of law and that the verdict was unreasonable. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had reviewed all the evidence and had weighed the strengths and weaknesses of the various witnesses’ testimony in order to arrive at a reasoned conclusion on the probative value of the evidence as a whole. The court also found that the trial judge had not split the evidence in a fragmentary or unequal manner and that her reasons did not support a conclusion that she had imposed on the applicant a burden that was not his to bear.