R. v. Abou-Akrouche
The Court allowed the appeal because the trial judge's misdirection on self-defence in the main charge and in response to a jury question was serious, could have affected the jury's assessment of all charges arising from one continuous incident (including dangerous driving), and therefore rendered the convictions...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 ONCA 154
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty The Queen; Appellant: Najah Abou-Akrouche
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 28 February 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; new trial ordered
- Legal Topics
- Self Defence, Jury Instructions, Misdirection, Dangerous Driving, Assault, Assault With a Weapon
- 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
Najah Abou-Akrouche
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge's jury charge and answer to a jury question contained a serious misdirection regarding self-defence
- 2 Whether the misdirection could have affected verdicts on all counts including dangerous driving
- 3 Whether a new trial is required
Ratio Decidendi
The Court allowed the appeal because the trial judge's misdirection on self-defence in the main charge and in response to a jury question was serious, could have affected the jury's assessment of all charges arising from one continuous incident (including dangerous driving), and therefore rendered the convictions unsafe; the conviction was set aside and a new trial ordered.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; new trial ordered
Orders
- Conviction set aside
- New trial ordered
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Abou-Akrouche Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2011-02-28 Neutral citation 2011 ONCA 154 Docket numbers C49413 Judges Winkler, Warren Keith; Rosenberg, Marc; Goudge, Stephen Thomas Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Abou-Akrouche, 2011 ONCA 154 DATE:20110228 DOCKET: C49413 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Winkler, C.J.O., Rosenberg and Goudge JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty The Queen Respondent and Najah Abou-Akrouche Appellant Monte MacGregor, for the appellant Susan G. Ficek, for the respondent Heard and endorsed: February 25, 2011 On appeal from conviction by Justice Heidi Polowin of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, dated March 6, 2008. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The Crown properly concedes that there was a serious error relating to self-defence in the main charge to the jury and again in the answer to a question from the jury. While self-defence was only left with the jury in relation to the charges of assault and assault with a weapon, in our view, the misdirection affected all the charges given that this was one continuous series of events that occurred over a very short period. In particular, the jury may well have taken a different view of the dangerous driving charge had they found the appellant’s initial encounter with the complainant was lawful because he acted in self-defence. [2] Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the conviction set aside and a new trial ordered.