R. v. Tremblay
The trial judge applied the correct legal test for mens rea and the evidence demonstrated the appellant was reckless—he was aware of the risk his conduct would harass the complainant yet persisted—therefore the conviction for criminal harassment is upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 ONCA 277
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Jean Guy Tremblay
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 7 April 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision (appeal From Conviction)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; conviction affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Harassment, Mens Rea, Recklessness, Conviction Appeal
- 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
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Jean Guy Tremblay
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision (appeal From Conviction)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge applied the correct legal test for the accused's mental state (mens rea) in criminal harassment
- 2 Whether the evidence supports a finding of the required mens rea (recklessness)
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge applied the correct legal test for mens rea and the evidence demonstrated the appellant was reckless—he was aware of the risk his conduct would harass the complainant yet persisted—therefore the conviction for criminal harassment is upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction affirmed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction for criminal harassment affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Tremblay Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2011-04-07 Neutral citation 2011 ONCA 277 Docket numbers C50223 Judges Laskin, John Ivan; MacPherson, James C.; Sharpe, Robert J. Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Tremblay, 2011 ONCA 277 DATE: 20110407 DOCKET: C50223 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Laskin, MacPherson and Sharpe JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Jean Guy Tremblay Appellant P. Andras Schreck, for the appellant Deborah Krick, for the respondent Heard: April 6, 2011 On appeal from the conviction entered on October 19, 2007 by Justice Andromache Karakatsanis of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant appeals his conviction for criminal harassment. He contends that the trial judge applied the wrong legal test for the accused’s mental state and that the evidence does not support a finding of the required mens rea. We do not accept the appellant’s contention. [2] At para. 56 of her reasons, the trial judge stated the correct legal test for the mens rea component of the offence. And, reading her reasons as a whole we are satisfied that she applied the correct test. Moreover, the evidence fully supports her finding that the appellant’s conduct was reckless. The appellant spent nine hours at the used car lot owned by the complainant and her husband, even though he never intended to buy a car or try to get a job. He was obsessed with the complainant and was aware there was a risk his conduct harassed the complainant, yet he went ahead anyway. [3] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.