R. v. Sylliboy
The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not misapprehend the evidence and the inference that the appellant fired at James Blair with intent to kill, or alternatively to cause bodily harm that he knew was likely to result in death, was the only reasonable inference available on the evidence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2025 NSCA 81
- Parties
- Appellant: Kevin Sylliboy; Respondent: His Majesty the King
- Court
- Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 November 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Intent to Kill, Circumstantial Evidence and Inferences, Standard of Appellate Review, Misapprehension of Evidence
- 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
Kevin Sylliboy
Appellant
His Majesty the King
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge misapprehended the evidence of Dr. Erik Mont
- 2 Whether the trial judge reasonably drew the inference that the appellant intended to kill James Blair
- 3 Whether the evidence supported an alternative finding that the appellant intended to cause bodily harm that he knew was likely to cause death
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not misapprehend the evidence and the inference that the appellant fired at James Blair with intent to kill, or alternatively to cause bodily harm that he knew was likely to result in death, was the only reasonable inference available on the evidence.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Sylliboy Court Court of Appeal Date 2025-11-20 Citation 2025 NSCA 81 Docket CAC 516866 Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Farrar, David P.S. (Honourable Justice) (CA); Bryson, Peter M.S. (Honourable Justice) (CA); Van den Eynden, Elizabeth (Honourable Justice) (CA) Document Type Decision Decision Content Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Citation: R. v. Sylliboy, 2025 NSCA 81 Date: 20251120 Docket: CAC 516866 Registry: Halifax Between: Kevin Sylliboy Appellant v. His Majesty the King Respondent Judges: Farrar, Bryson, Van den Eynden, JJ.A. Appeal Heard: November 20, 2025, in Halifax, Nova Scotia Written Release: November 20, 2025 Held: Appeal dismissed, per reasons for judgment by the Court Counsel: Michael Lacy, for the appellant Glenn Hubbard, for the respondent Reasons for judgment: By the Court (Orally) [1] We are unanimously of the view the appeal ought to be dismissed. [2] The appellant’s argument the trial judge somehow misapprehended the evidence of Dr. Erik Mont is entirely without merit. [3] The trial judge was entitled to draw inferences based on the presented evidence. He engaged the correct legal test and concluded the only reasonable inference that could be drawn under the circumstances was the appellant fired at James Blair with the requisite intent to kill him. [4] The question for the Court is whether the inference drawn by the trial judge was reasonable.[1] [5] The trial judge’s inferences are well grounded in the evidence presented to him. [6] There was no basis to conclude, on that evidence, the shot fired was intended for Mr. Blair’s arm. [7] The trial judge’s conclusion the appellant intended to kill Mr. Blair, or in the alternative, cause Mr. Blair bodily harm that he knew would likely result in his death, was reasonable. [8] The appeal is dismissed. Farrar, J.A. Bryson, J.A. Van den Eynden, J.A. [1] See R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33 at para. 37.