R. v. Nosworthy
The court concluded the verdict was unreasonable because the divisibility of the monies was not a genuine distinguishing feature despite expert evidence and the supposed retreat was too speculative to infer consciousness of guilt; accordingly the convictions were quashed and acquittals entered.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C32736
- Parties
- Appellant: Barrington Nosworthy; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 11 February 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (conviction by Ferrier J. March 5, 1993; Sentence April 21, 1993)
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; acquittals entered.
- Legal Topics
- Unreasonable Verdict, Consciousness of Guilt, Expert Evidence, Acquittal, Inference From Retreat
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Barrington Nosworthy
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (conviction by Ferrier J. March 5, 1993; Sentence April 21, 1993)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction was unreasonable
- 2 Whether the appellant's retreat constituted consciousness of guilt
- 3 Whether expert evidence made the monetary divisibility a distinguishing feature
Ratio Decidendi
The court concluded the verdict was unreasonable because the divisibility of the monies was not a genuine distinguishing feature despite expert evidence and the supposed retreat was too speculative to infer consciousness of guilt; accordingly the convictions were quashed and acquittals entered.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; acquittals entered.
Orders
- Allow the appeal
- Quash the convictions
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Nosworthy Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2000-02-11 Docket numbers C32736 Judges Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Rosenberg, Marc; MacPherson, James C. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20000211 DOCKET: C32736 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. BARRINGTON NOSWORTHY (Appellant) BEFORE: ABELLA, ROSENBERG and MacPHERSON JJ.A. COUNSEL: P. Andras Schreck, for the appellant Rick Visca, for the respondent HEARD: January 21, 2000 On appeal from his conviction by Mr. Justice Ferrier on March 5, 1993 and from the sentence imposed on April 21, 1993 ENDORSEMENT [1] In 1995, this court found that the conviction of the appellant’s wife on virtually the same set of facts was unreasonable. The only distinguishing features referred to by the trial judge were that the monies connected to the appellant could be divided by twenty and that the appellant demonstrated a consciousness of guilt by retreating as the police entered. [2] In our view, despite the expert evidence the first factor is simply not a distinguishing feature. As to the so-called retreat, there was no evidence that the appellant was attempting to escape and it was not a reasonable inference that the appellant was attempting to hide anything. The officer said that he guessed the appellant had something in his hand. This was too tenuous a basis to support a finding of consciousness of guilt. [3] In view of the disposition of the appeal of the appellant’s wife, this verdict as well cannot stand. We agree with the appellant that this verdict is also unreasonable. [4] Accordingly, we would allow the appeal, quash the convictions and enter acquittals. (signed) "R. S. Abella J.A." (signed) "M. Rosenberg J.A." (signed) "J. C. MacPherson J.A."