Osborne v. The Queen
- Citation
- [1984] 2 SCR 406
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 1 November 1984
- Posture
- Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Alberta Court of Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 1 November 1984
- Posture
- Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Alberta Court of Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding the Alberta Court of Appeal committed no error of law; the published standard graph provided to the analyst did not amount to evidence to the contrary or create reasonable doubt as to the substance's identity; wiretap and videotape evidence were properly admitted; and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the trafficking/manufacture conviction.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction for trafficking in a controlled drug (amphetamine) upheld
02
Material facts
Parties
James Robert Osborne
Appellant Counsel: J. MacLeod WalkerHer Majesty The Queen
Respondent Counsel: S.R. Fainstein03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Alberta Court of Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the standard graph not prepared by the analyst but contained in a publication provided to him constituted 'evidence to the contrary' undermining identification of the substance
- 02
Whether there was reasonable doubt as to the nature of the substance (amphetamine)
- 03
Whether wiretap and videotape evidence were properly admitted
- 04
Whether the accused was proven to have 'manufactured' amphetamine
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant argued the conviction was unsafe because the standard graph used to identify the substance was not prepared by the analyst and came from a publication provided to him, creating 'evidence to the contrary' and reasonable doubt about identity; that admission of wiretap and videotape evidence was improper; and that the Crown did not prove manufacturing of amphetamine.
- Respondent
- Respondent argued the Court of Appeal correctly found no error of law, that the evidence including the published standard graph, wiretap and videotape was admissible and sufficient to identify the substance beyond reasonable doubt, and that the trial properly found manufacture proved.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal law burden of proof principle
The Crown must prove the identity of the controlled substance beyond a reasonable doubt
- 02
Evidentiary admissibility principles
Scientific evidence is admissible where it is reliable and the parties have an opportunity to rebut; use of published reference material does not automatically constitute 'evidence to the contrary'
- 03
Appellate review standard
An appellate court will overturn a conviction only for an error of law or a palpable and overriding error of fact; absent such error the conviction stands
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding the Alberta Court of Appeal committed no error of law; the published standard graph provided to the analyst did not amount to evidence to the contrary or create reasonable doubt as to the substance's identity; wiretap and videotape evidence were properly admitted; and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the trafficking/manufacture conviction.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction for trafficking in a controlled drug (amphetamine) upheld
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 1 November 1984
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 1 November 1984
Osborne v. The Queen Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1984-11-01 Report [1984] 2 SCR 406 Case number 17220 Judges Estey, Willard Zebedee; McIntyre, William Rogers; Chouinard, Julien; Wilson, Bertha; Le Dain, Gerald Eric On appeal from Alberta Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 17220 Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Osborne v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 406 Date: 1984-11-01 James Robert Osborne Appellant; and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent. File No.: 17220. 1984: November 1. Present: Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard, Wilson and Le Dain JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ALBERTA Criminal law—Evidence—Trafficking conviction —Controlled drug: amphetamine—Standard graph not prepared by analyst but contained in publication provided to him—Whether “evidence to the contrary”—Whether doubt as to the nature of the substance—Admission of wiretap and video tape evidence—Whether accused “manufactured” amphetamine. APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal[1], dismissing appellant’s appeal from his conviction on a charge of trafficking in a controlled drug[2]. Appeal dismissed. J. MacLeod Walker, for the appellant. S.R. Fainstein, for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by ESTEY J.—After hearing full argument by counsel for appellant and respondent, we are all of the view that the Court of Appeal committed no error of law in dismissing the appeal from the judgment at trial, and accordingly this appeal is dismissed. Judgment accordingly. Solicitor for the appellant: J. MacLeod Walker, Edmonton. Solicitor for the respondent: Roger Tassé, Ottawa. [1] Judgment rendered August 24, 1982 and amended January 28, 1983. [2] Judgment rendered by V.W. Smith J. of the Court of Queen’s Bench on September 18, 1981.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.