R. v. Escobar-Benavidez

R. v. Escobar-Benavidez

The recharge on the accused's criminal record, when read in context, could not have misled the jury, and the trial judge did not err in failing to instruct the jury on post‑offence conduct (no such instruction was requested); accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the jury conviction is affirmed.

Citation
2005 SCC 68
Parties
Appellant / Accused: Elidio Donato Escobar‑Benavidez; Respondent / Crown: Her Majesty The Queen
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the British Columbia Court of Appeal; Judgment Delivered on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction for second degree murder upheld; verdict of the jury confirmed.
Legal Topics
Charge to Jury, Criminal Record, Post‑offence Conduct, Jury Instructions, Appeal Standard, Criminal Code S.686(1)(b)(iii)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charge to Jury Criminal Record Post‑offence Conduct Jury Instructions Appeal Standard Criminal Code S.686(1)(b)(iii)

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elidio Donato Escobar‑Benavidez

Appellant / Accused

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent / Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the British Columbia Court of Appeal; Judgment Delivered on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the recharge on the accused's criminal record could have misled the jury
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred by failing to instruct the jury on post‑offence conduct
  3. 3 Whether it was necessary to consider the application of Criminal Code s.686(1)(b)(iii)

Ratio Decidendi

The recharge on the accused's criminal record, when read in context, could not have misled the jury, and the trial judge did not err in failing to instruct the jury on post‑offence conduct (no such instruction was requested); accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the jury conviction is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction for second degree murder upheld; verdict of the jury confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Verdict of the jury confirmed