R. v. Yelle
- Citation
- 2014 SCC 10
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 22 January 2014
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Dismissed
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 22 January 2014
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Dismissed
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The jury's conviction for assault was reasonable in light of photographic evidence; the trial judge was not required to give a witness reliability warning in the circumstances; and the decision to instruct on the lesser included offence of assault was within the trial judge's discretion and entitled to deference.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction for assault upheld
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction for assault upheld
02
Material facts
Parties
Gary Edward Yelle
Appellant Counsel: Charles B. DavisonHer Majesty The Queen
Respondent Counsel: Susanne Boucher; François LacasseAmounts and remedies
- Docket: 35,361
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Dismissed
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the jury's guilty verdict on the lesser included offence of assault was reasonable
- 02
Whether the trial judge erred by failing to give a warning as to witness reliability
- 03
Whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury on the lesser included offence of assault
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant argued the verdict was unreasonable and the trial judge should have given a warning regarding the reliability of the complainant's testimony; the instruction to the jury on the lesser included offence led to an unreasonable conviction.
- Respondent
- The Crown argued photographic evidence established assault beyond a reasonable doubt, no witness reliability warning was required in the circumstances, and the trial judge properly exercised discretion in instructing on the lesser included offence and that decision is entitled to deference.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence (this judgment)
A jury verdict will not be overturned on appeal unless it is unreasonable in light of the evidence
- 02
Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence (this judgment)
Trial judges have discretion to instruct juries on lesser included offences where supported by the evidence and that discretion attracts appellate deference
- 03
Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence (this judgment)
A cautionary warning about witness reliability is required only when particular concerns about credibility or reliability arise from the evidence
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The jury's conviction for assault was reasonable in light of photographic evidence; the trial judge was not required to give a witness reliability warning in the circumstances; and the decision to instruct on the lesser included offence of assault was within the trial judge's discretion and entitled to deference.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction for assault upheld
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction for assault upheld
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 22 January 2014
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· 22 January 2014
R. v. Yelle Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 2014-01-22 Neutral citation 2014 SCC 10 Report [2014] 1 SCR 140 Case number 35361 Judges McLachlin, Beverley; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Rothstein, Marshall; Cromwell, Thomas Albert; Moldaver, Michael J. On appeal from Northwest Territories Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 35361 Decision Content
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. Yelle, 2014 SCC 10, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 140 Date: 20140122 Docket: 35361 Between: Gary Edward Yelle Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ. Reasons for Judgment: (para.
1) McLachlin C.J. (Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ. concurring) R. v. Yelle, 2014 SCC 10, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 140 Gary Edward Yelle Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. Yelle 2014 SCC 10 File No.: 35361. 2014: January 22. Present: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for the northwest territories Criminal law — Reasonable verdict — Accused charged with sexual assault and uttering threats — Jury returning guilty verdict to lesser included offence of assault — Jury’s verdict reasonable in light of photographic evidence establishing assault beyond a reasonable doubt — Trial judge not required in circumstances to give warning as to witness reliability — Trial judge’s decision to instruct on lesser offence of assault entitled to deference having regard to totality of evidence. APPEAL from a judgment of the Northwest Territories Court of Appeal (Paperny, Martin and Charbonneau JJ.A.), 2013 NWTCA 2, [2013] N.W.T.J. No. 47 (QL), 2013 CarswellNWT 49, upholding the conviction for assault entered by Shaner J., 2012 NWTSC 46, [2012] N.W.T.J. No. 52 (QL), 2012 CarswellNWT 48. Appeal dismissed. Charles B. Davison, for the appellant. Susanne Boucher and François Lacasse, for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by [1] The Chief Justice — We agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the verdict was not unreasonable. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: Somba K’e Law Office, Yellowknife. Solicitor for the respondent: Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Yellowknife.
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.