R. v. Quinn
The appeal is dismissed because the preliminary hearing judge committed a jurisdictional error by improperly weighing competing inferences about forcible confinement; the reviewing judge was correct to quash the discharge.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2008 ONCA 642
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: John Quinn
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 22 September 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Order Quashing Discharge After Preliminary Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Preliminary Hearing, Forcible Confinement, Evidence Assessment, Jurisdictional Error, Jury Instruction
- 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
John Quinn
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Order Quashing Discharge After Preliminary Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the preliminary hearing judge improperly weighed competing inferences when deciding whether evidence supported an inference of forcible confinement
- 2 Whether the pathologist's evidence of blunt and compressive force to the deceased's wrists was capable of supporting an inference of forcible confinement
- 3 Whether the order quashing the discharge should be upheld
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because the preliminary hearing judge committed a jurisdictional error by improperly weighing competing inferences about forcible confinement; the reviewing judge was correct to quash the discharge.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Order quashing the discharge on the first degree murder charge upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Quinn Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2008-09-22 Neutral citation 2008 ONCA 642 Docket numbers C48701 Judges O’Connor, Dennis; Juriansz, Russell G.; MacFarland, Jean Louise Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Quinn, 2008 ONCA 642 DATE: 20080922 DOCKET: C48701 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO O’Connor A.C.J.O., Juriansz and MacFarland JJ.A. BETWEEN: Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and John Quinn Appellant Seth Weinstein for the appellant Craig Harper for the respondent Heard: September 19, 2008 On appeal from the order of R.S.J. Edward F. Then of the Superior Court of Justice dated January 19, 2007. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant appeals the order quashing his discharge on a charge of first degree murder. He does not contest his committal for second degree murder. [2] The preliminary hearing judge found that the pathologist’s evidence that blunt and compressive force was applied to the deceased’s wrists was not capable of supporting an inference of forcible confinement. In arriving at that conclusion he reviewed the evidence the deceased was free to come and go from the appellant’s apartment and there was no yelling or screaming heard by close neighbours through paper-thin walls. He concluded “All of that militates against forcible confinement”. The preliminary hearing judge recognized there were “competing inferences of restraint or lack thereof” but then added “no reasonable jury, properly instructed, could arrive at a conclusion that one predominates over the other”. [3] In approaching the evidence in this way, the preliminary hearing judge committed jurisdictional error by improperly weighing competing inferences. We agree with the reviewing judge’s reasons and disposition. The appeal is dismissed.