R. v. Hennigar

R. v. Hennigar

On the totality of the agreed facts and unanimous, credible expert psychiatric evidence the court found as a matter of law that the accused suffered from schizophrenia and was in an acute psychotic state on January 7, 2015 such that he was incapable of knowing his acts were morally wrong; the Crown discharged the balance of probabilities burden and the accused is therefore not criminally responsible under s.16(1); matter remitted to the Review Board for disposition.

Citation
2017 NSSC 32
Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Codey Hennigar
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Second Degree Murder With Not Criminally Responsible Inquiry / Trial Decision on Applicability of S.16 and Remittance to Review Board
Outcome
Defendant found not criminally responsible under s.16(1) for three counts of second degree murder
Legal Topics
Not Criminally Responsible (s.16), Disease of the Mind, Moral Wrongness Test, Expert Psychiatric Evidence, Burden and Standard of Proof, Review Board Disposition
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Forensic Psychiatry Evidence Expert Opinion Not Criminally Responsible (s.16) Disease of the Mind Moral Wrongness Test Expert Psychiatric Evidence +2 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecutor

Codey Hennigar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Second Degree Murder With Not Criminally Responsible Inquiry / Trial Decision on Applicability of S.16 and Remittance to Review Board

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was suffering from a mental disorder (disease of the mind) at the time of the acts
  2. 2 Whether that disorder rendered the accused incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the acts or of knowing that they were wrong (s.16 branches)
  3. 3 Whether the Crown met the onus on a balance of probabilities to displace the presumption of criminal responsibility

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the agreed facts and unanimous, credible expert psychiatric evidence the court found as a matter of law that the accused suffered from schizophrenia and was in an acute psychotic state on January 7, 2015 such that he was incapable of knowing his acts were morally wrong; the Crown discharged the balance of probabilities burden and the accused is therefore not criminally responsible under s.16(1); matter remitted to the Review Board for disposition.

Court Disposition

Defendant found not criminally responsible under s.16(1) for three counts of second degree murder

Orders

  • No disposition by this Court pursuant to s.672.45; matter remitted to the Review Board pursuant to s.672.47 for disposition
  • Verdict entered under s.672.34: not criminally responsible on three counts of second degree murder