R. v. Yalcin

R. v. Yalcin

The judge was left with a reasonable doubt as to whether Forrest was in the back of the truck when the accused started to drive (based on testimony of the accused and passenger and weaknesses in Crown witnesses), therefore the Crown failed to prove dangerous driving causing bodily harm beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused was acquitted; the court further found that driving on Lucasville Road was not a proper included offence for the charged facts because it was not a necessary part of the transaction focused on the driveway incident and convicting on that basis would be unfair; the necessity defence was rejected because there was no imminent peril and reasonable legal alternatives...

Citation
2018 NSSC 134
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Riza Yalcin
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm / Trial Judgment (supreme Court of Nova Scotia)
Outcome
Acquitted of charge of dangerous driving causing bodily harm; no conviction entered for included offence of dangerous driving relating to Lucasville Road; defence of necessity rejected.
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm, Dangerous Driving (included Offence), Included Offences, Burden of Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, Credibility Assessment (w.(d.)), Necessity Defence, Fair Notice Under Indictment
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Charter of Rights Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm Dangerous Driving (included Offence) Included Offences +4 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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Riza Yalcin

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm / Trial Judgment (supreme Court of Nova Scotia)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was aware or should have been aware that the complainant was in the back of the truck when he started to drive away (mens rea)
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved dangerous driving causing bodily harm beyond a reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether dangerous driving on Lucasville Road was a lesser included offence of the charged offence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was left with a reasonable doubt as to whether Forrest was in the back of the truck when the accused started to drive (based on testimony of the accused and passenger and weaknesses in Crown witnesses), therefore the Crown failed to prove dangerous driving causing bodily harm beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused was acquitted; the court further found that driving on Lucasville Road was not a proper included offence for the charged facts because it was not a necessary part of the transaction focused on the driveway incident and convicting on that basis would be unfair; the necessity defence was rejected because there was no imminent peril and reasonable legal alternatives...

Court Disposition

Acquitted of charge of dangerous driving causing bodily harm; no conviction entered for included offence of dangerous driving relating to Lucasville Road; defence of necessity rejected.

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty of dangerous driving causing bodily harm; no included offence conviction entered; matter dismissed.