R. v. Good

R. v. Good

The judge found the accused's account unreliable and the complainant's account and supporting evidence more consistent with the probabilities; self-defence was rejected; assault was proven beyond a reasonable doubt but bodily harm was not established beyond a reasonable doubt due to lack of medical causation evidence; the uttering of a death threat was proven on an objective assessment; possession of the pellet gun for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or to commit an offence was proven by the manner of its use and the contemporaneous threatening words, therefore convictions for assault, uttering a threat and possession for a dangerous purpose were entered.

Citation
2011 NSPC 4
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: Corey Ryan Good
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Decision (conviction)
Outcome
Accused convicted of simple assault, uttering a death threat, and possession of a pellet gun for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or to commit an offence; charge of pointing a firearm dismissed for want of prosecution; bodily harm not proven
Legal Topics
Assault, Uttering Threats, Possession of Weapon for Dangerous Purpose, Self Defence, Credibility Assessment, Causation, Bodily Harm Definition
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Assault Uttering Threats Possession of Weapon for Dangerous Purpose Self Defence Credibility Assessment Causation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

Corey Ryan Good

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Decision (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused acted in self-defence
  2. 2 Whether the accused caused bodily harm to the complainant
  3. 3 Whether the accused uttered a death threat

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found the accused's account unreliable and the complainant's account and supporting evidence more consistent with the probabilities; self-defence was rejected; assault was proven beyond a reasonable doubt but bodily harm was not established beyond a reasonable doubt due to lack of medical causation evidence; the uttering of a death threat was proven on an objective assessment; possession of the pellet gun for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or to commit an offence was proven by the manner of its use and the contemporaneous threatening words, therefore convictions for assault, uttering a threat and possession for a dangerous purpose were entered.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted of simple assault, uttering a death threat, and possession of a pellet gun for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or to commit an offence; charge of pointing a firearm dismissed for want of prosecution; bodily harm not proven

Orders

  • Charge of pointing a firearm dismissed for want of prosecution