Reference re Milgaard (Can.)

Reference re Milgaard (Can.)

The Court held that although it was not satisfied of Milgaard's innocence beyond a reasonable doubt or on a balance of probabilities, credible fresh evidence was presented which, when combined with the trial record, could reasonably be expected to have affected the jury's verdict; accordingly the continued conviction constituted a miscarriage of justice and the Court recommended that the Minister of Justice quash the conviction and direct a new trial under s.690(a) of the Criminal Code.

Citation
[1992] 1 SCR 866
Parties
Applicant/accused: David Milgaard; Respondent: Attorney General for Saskatchewan; Respondent: Attorney General of Canada; Interested Party/third Party: Larry B. Fisher
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 April 1992
Procedural Posture
Reference by Governor in Council (s.53 Supreme Court Act) / Hearing on Reference With Fresh Evidence; Advisory Judgment Recommending Quash and New Trial
Outcome
Advisory finding: continued conviction constitutes a miscarriage of justice; recommend conviction be quashed and a new trial directed.
Legal Topics
Miscarriage of Justice, Fresh Evidence, New Trial, Pardon, Reference to Supreme Court
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Administrative Law Miscarriage of Justice Fresh Evidence New Trial Pardon Reference to Supreme Court

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Milgaard

Applicant/accused

Attorney General for Saskatchewan

Respondent

Attorney General of Canada

Respondent

Larry B. Fisher

Interested Party/third Party

Procedural Posture

Reference by Governor in Council (s.53 Supreme Court Act) / Hearing on Reference With Fresh Evidence; Advisory Judgment Recommending Quash and New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the continued conviction of David Milgaard constitute a miscarriage of justice?
  2. 2 Whether Milgaard is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt or on a balance of probabilities
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence is reasonably capable of belief and could have affected the jury verdict

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that although it was not satisfied of Milgaard's innocence beyond a reasonable doubt or on a balance of probabilities, credible fresh evidence was presented which, when combined with the trial record, could reasonably be expected to have affected the jury's verdict; accordingly the continued conviction constituted a miscarriage of justice and the Court recommended that the Minister of Justice quash the conviction and direct a new trial under s.690(a) of the Criminal Code.

Court Disposition

Advisory finding: continued conviction constitutes a miscarriage of justice; recommend conviction be quashed and a new trial directed.

Orders

  • Recommend that the Minister of Justice quash the conviction and direct a new trial under s.690(a) of the Criminal Code.
  • Note that the Attorney General for Saskatchewan may enter a stay of proceedings if appropriate in all the circumstances.