Case information

Criminal law — Charge to jury — Jury questions — Reasonable doubt — Essential elements of offence of first degree murder — Extent to which instructions on “reasonable doubt” in criminal cases, as formulated in R. v. Lifchus, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 320, differ from those developed in R. v. Starr, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 144 — Where applicable, whether Starr type instructions should be added to or should supplement Lifchus type instructions given to jury on reasonable doubt in criminal cases — Whether judge of law gave jury inadequate instructions on “planning” and “deliberation” as essential elements of offence of first degree murder in response to jury’s specific question on subject.

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.

On March 20, 2019, the applicant, Giuseppe De Leto, was convicted of two counts of conspiracy to commit murder and two counts of first degree murder following a jury trial presided over by Vincent J. of the Superior Court. On appeal, Mr. De Leto argued that the trial judge had erred in his instructions to the jury.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. De Leto’s appeal. Among other things, it found that the trial judge’s initial instructions on proof beyond a reasonable doubt were consistent with the suggestions in Lifchus and that the judge was not required to add further instructions based on Starr to answer a question for clarification submitted by the jury. Moreover, in the circumstances, the trial judge had not erred in repeating the initial instructions to answer the jury’s questions.