Case information

Criminal law — Trial — Judgments — Reasons for judgment — Sufficiency of reasons — Whether the trial judge erred in law by failing to provide sufficient reasons for conviction

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)

The appellant, Dillon Ricky Whitehawk, was charged with the first degree murder of Keesha Bitternose. The trial judge found that Mr. Whitehawk was not guilty of first degree murder because the murder was not planned and deliberate, the victim was not forcibly confined, and the murder was not caused by Mr. Whitehawk in association with a criminal organization. Accordingly, Mr. Whitehawk was acquitted of first degree murder, but convicted of second degree murder. Mr. Whitehawk appealed his conviction, primarily alleging that the trial judge’s reasons were insufficient, thereby constituting either an error of law or an unreasonable verdict that warranted appellate intervention. The majority of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan dismissed the appeal. It saw no basis to find an error of law grounded in a claim that the judge’s reasons were insufficient. It further held that since the verdict was amply supported by the evidence, there was no basis for the court to intervene under s. 686(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code. Justice Drennan, dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and remitted the matter for a new trial. She concluded that the trial reasons do not justify and explain the result, are unintelligible as to the path to conviction taken by the judge, and are not responsive to the live issues at trial.