All 4 - CRIMES - Proof thereof
-
Category: 4 - CRIMES - Proof thereof, Grounds - for arrest or demand, and Impaired / 80%+ -s.253 & 320Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2018/05/01Download decision:R. v. Roberts, 2018 ONCA 411 (Paciocco): [82] In my view, the relevant, settled law can be stated in the following way. Lawfully obtained evidence conscripted from a detainee through roadside sobriety testing is admissible to establish grounds for an arrest or detention, but such evidence is not admissible as proof of actual alcohol consumption or impairment. As I will Read more...
-
Court level: Superior CourtDate of decision: 2018/10/05Download decision:R v McKinnon, 2018 ONSC 4781 (Gareau): [76] Section 162(2) of the Criminal Code defines the term “visual recording” to include photographic. Regrettably, there is no definition of what is intended by the phrase “surreptitiously” in the Criminal Code. The dictionary’s definition of surreptitious is “covert or clandestine”, or, in other words, something that is done secretly. In the case Read more...
-
Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2018/12/12Download decision:R v. McPhee – 2018 ONCA 1016 (Hoy): [1] A. HOY A.C.J.O.:– On September 12, 2013, the appellant, Jordan McPhee, threw a single punch at Kevin Dhillon, his cellmate at the Maplehurst Correctional Facility. The punch landed on Dhillon’s face, beside his left eye, and broke his orbital bone. Dhillon required surgery as a result. | | [9] It was Read more...
-
Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2019/01/10Download decision:R v Zora – 2019 BCCA 9 (Stromberg-Stein): [1] Chaycen Michael Zora appeals his convictions for breaching his recognizance by failing to present himself at his door for two curfew compliance checks contrary to s. 145(3) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46. The sole issue is whether s. 145(3) imports an objective standard of mens rea. [2] In Read more...
-
Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2019/03/22Download decision:R v Hussein – 2019 ONCA 230 (Per Curiam): [1] Mr. Ali Abdul-Hussein was a material witness to a killing. After being subpoenaed to testify at the murder trial as a Crown witness, he fled Canada in a deliberate attempt to avoid giving evidence. Although Mr. Abdul-Hussein was unaware of it when he fled, the subpoena was issued improperly: the Read more...