R. v. Alex

R. v. Alex

Although the accused suffered from schizophrenia, the defence failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the mental disorder rendered him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his actions or of knowing they were wrong; the court preferred the Crown expert's conclusions, accepted evidence of prior feigning and indicia of planning and deception, and dismissed the NCR application.

Citation
2018 NSPC 3
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Randy Alex
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal NCR Application Under S.16 Criminal Code / Post Conviction Application for Verdict of Not Criminally Responsible
Outcome
Application for verdict of Not Criminally Responsible dismissed; accused remains criminally responsible
Legal Topics
Not Criminally Responsible (ncr), S.16 Defence, Burden of Proof, Expert Evidence, Malingering
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Forensic Psychiatry Not Criminally Responsible (ncr) S.16 Defence Burden of Proof Expert Evidence Malingering

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Randy Alex

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal NCR Application Under S.16 Criminal Code / Post Conviction Application for Verdict of Not Criminally Responsible

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused's mental disorder rendered him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act
  2. 2 Whether accused's mental disorder rendered him incapable of knowing the act was wrong
  3. 3 Whether the defence discharged the burden on balance of probabilities to displace presumption of criminal responsibility

Ratio Decidendi

Although the accused suffered from schizophrenia, the defence failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the mental disorder rendered him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his actions or of knowing they were wrong; the court preferred the Crown expert's conclusions, accepted evidence of prior feigning and indicia of planning and deception, and dismissed the NCR application.

Court Disposition

Application for verdict of Not Criminally Responsible dismissed; accused remains criminally responsible

Orders

  • Application for verdict of Not Criminally Responsible under s.672.34 denied
  • No s.16 verdict rendered; conviction stands