R v. CB, 2019 ONCA 380 (Watt): [63] To determine this ground of appeal requires consideration of what is involved in the process of authentication; how it may be established, especially with respect to the subject-matter in issue here; and the roles of the trier of law and the trier of fact in the authentication process. [64] The requirement of Read more...
R v Lenhardt – 2019 ONCA 416 (per curiam): [8] There was very little evidence on this point at trial. The appellant, in his evidence, testified that although the police had finished processing him at around 2:30 a.m., he did not receive access to counsel until about 8:00 a.m. The appellant was not asked any questions about this time period Read more...
R v Omar – 2019 SCC 32 (Brown): Upholds the ONCA decision (excerpted below). R v Omar – 2018 ONCA 975 (Brown): [75] Grant offered general guidance at the conceptual level about when a psychological detention occurs. However, the jurisprudence reveals that the application of Grant’s conceptual principles to the reality of street-level interactions stills leaves us in the situation Read more...
R v Barton – 2019 SCC 33 (Moldaver): [70] The first substantive issue is one of scope: Can the s. 276 regime apply in a case where the offence charged — here, murder under ss. 231(5)(c) and 235(1) — is not one of the offences listed in s. 276(1)? [71] This issue raises a question of statutory interpretation. The modern Read more...
R v Barton – 2019 SCC 33 (Moldaver): [87] A conviction for sexual assault, like any other true crime, requires that the Crown prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the actus reus and had the necessary mens rea. A person commits the actus reus of sexual assault “if he touches another person in a sexual way without Read more...