R. v. MacDonald

R. v. MacDonald

The accused intentionally struck the seated complainant with a closed fist causing two mandible fractures; the complainant did not consent and no reasonable grounds existed for a belief in consent; the Crown proved all elements of aggravated assault under s.268(1) beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore the accused is...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2010 NSSC 280
Parties
Crown: The Queen; Accused: Graham Keith MacDonald
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Aggravated Assault / Trial Judgment (guilt)
Outcome
Convicted of aggravated assault under s.268(1) of the Criminal Code
Legal Topics
Aggravated Assault, Consent, Use of Force, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Aggravated Assault Consent Use of Force Credibility Assessment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Crown

Graham Keith MacDonald

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Aggravated Assault / Trial Judgment (guilt)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused applied force to the complainant
  2. 2 Whether the complainant consented to the application of force
  3. 3 Whether the Crown proved aggravated assault under s.268(1) beyond a reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The accused intentionally struck the seated complainant with a closed fist causing two mandible fractures; the complainant did not consent and no reasonable grounds existed for a belief in consent; the Crown proved all elements of aggravated assault under s.268(1) beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore the accused is guilty.

Court Disposition

Convicted of aggravated assault under s.268(1) of the Criminal Code