R. v. Demedeiros
- Citation
- 2019 SCC 11
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 14 February 2019
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Final Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 14 February 2019
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Final Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appeal is dismissed because appellate deference to the trial judge's credibility assessment was warranted and the verdict was not unreasonable; therefore the convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement are upheld.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement affirmed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Nelson Silva Demedeiros
Appellant Counsel: Heather Ferg; Karen B. MolleHer Majesty The Queen
Respondent Counsel: Troy CouillardAmounts and remedies
- Case Number: 38,269
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Final Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the verdict was unreasonable
- 02
Whether the appellate court should overturn the trial judge's credibility findings
- 03
Whether convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement should be set aside
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant argued the verdict was unreasonable and that the trial judge erred in assessing credibility, warranting overturning convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement.
- Respondent
- Crown argued appellate courts must defer to the trial judge's credibility findings absent palpable and overriding error; the evidence could reasonably support the convictions and they should be upheld.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Supreme Court precedent / common law appellate review
Deference to trial judge's credibility findings; appellate courts should not overturn credibility findings absent palpable and overriding error.
- 02
Criminal law standards (Supreme Court jurisprudence)
Verdict unreasonable standard: a conviction is unreasonable only if no reasonable jury properly instructed and acting judicially could have convicted on the evidence.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because appellate deference to the trial judge's credibility assessment was warranted and the verdict was not unreasonable; therefore the convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement are upheld.
Obiter and limits
- Court confirmed the high degree of deference owed to trial judges on credibility findings, including in sexual assault contexts.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld.
- Appeal dismissed.
- Convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement affirmed.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 14 February 2019
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· 14 February 2019
R. v. Demedeiros Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 2019-02-14 Neutral citation 2019 SCC 11 Report [2019] 1 SCR 568 Case number 38269 Judges Moldaver, Michael J.; Gascon, Clément; Brown, Russell; Rowe, Malcolm; Martin, Sheilah On appeal from Alberta Notes SCC Case Information Decision Content
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. Demedeiros, 2019 SCC 11, [2019] 1 S.C.R. 568 Appeal Heard: February 14, 2019 Judgment Rendered: February 14, 2019 Docket: 38269 Between: Nelson Silva Demedeiros Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Coram: Moldaver, Gascon, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. Reasons for Judgment: (para.
1) Moldaver J. (Gascon, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. concurring) R. v. Demedeiros, 2019 SCC 11, [2019] 1 S.C.R. 568 Nelson Silva Demedeiros Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. Demedeiros 2019 SCC 11 File No.: 38269. 2019: February 14. Present: Moldaver, Gascon, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta Criminal law — Unreasonable verdict — Evidence — Assessment — Accused appealing convictions for sexual assault with weapon and unlawful confinement — Court of Appeal dismissing appeal — Deference owed to trial judge’s credibility assessment — Verdict not unreasonable — Convictions upheld. APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (Berger, Costigan and Slatter JJ.A.), 2018 ABCA 241, 364 C.C.C. (3d) 271, 74 Alta. L.R. (6th) 1, 431 D.L.R. (4th) 650, [2018] 10 W.W.R. 293, [2018] A.J. No. 831 (QL), 2018 CarswellAlta 1313 (WL Can.), affirming the convictions entered by MacDonald Prov. Ct. J., 2016 ABPC 129, [2016] A.J. No. 983 (QL), 2016 CarswellAlta 1833 (WL Can.). Appeal dismissed. Heather Ferg and Karen B. Molle, for the appellant. Troy Couillard, for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by [1] Moldaver J. — We would dismiss the appeal, substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Court of Appeal. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: McKay Criminal Defence, Calgary; Karen Molle Law Office, Calgary. Solicitor for the respondent: Alberta Department of Justice, Edmonton.
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.