R. v. MacLaren

R. v. MacLaren

The court convicted under s.90 because the ASP baton was a weapon within s.2 and the accused, knowing that, carried it in her purse such that concealment was the plain and obvious consequence of her act (satisfying the mens rea under Felawka). The court acquitted under s.88 because possession for legitimate self‑defence did not constitute possession for a purpose dangerous to the public peace.

Citation
2012 NSPC 120
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Danielle Christian MacLaren
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal (criminal Code Ss.88 and 90) / Decision (provincial Court)
Outcome
Guilty on charge under s.90; Not guilty on charge under s.88.
Legal Topics
Carrying Concealed Weapon, Possession for Purpose Dangerous to Public Peace, Mens Rea, Self Defence, Case Law Precedent
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Weapons Law Statutory Interpretation Carrying Concealed Weapon Possession for Purpose Dangerous to Public Peace Mens Rea Self Defence Case Law Precedent

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Danielle Christian MacLaren

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (criminal Code Ss.88 and 90) / Decision (provincial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the ASP baton being carried by the accused?
  2. 2 Was the ASP baton a "weapon" within the meaning of ss.90 and 88 of the Criminal Code?
  3. 3 Was the baton concealed?

Ratio Decidendi

The court convicted under s.90 because the ASP baton was a weapon within s.2 and the accused, knowing that, carried it in her purse such that concealment was the plain and obvious consequence of her act (satisfying the mens rea under Felawka). The court acquitted under s.88 because possession for legitimate self‑defence did not constitute possession for a purpose dangerous to the public peace.

Court Disposition

Guilty on charge under s.90; Not guilty on charge under s.88.

Orders

  • Convicted under s.90 Criminal Code (carrying a concealed weapon)
  • Acquitted under s.88 Criminal Code (possession for purpose dangerous to the public peace)