R. v. Sabattis

Court convicted the accused of failing to comply with recognizance and undertaking conditions (s.145(3) and s.145(5.1)) but acquitted him of robbery under s.344/343(a) because, on the totality of the evidence and applying the objective test while considering the victim's perceptions and the accused's intoxication, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused conveyed a threat or had the requisite intention to do so.

Citation: 2012 NSPC 11
Parties: Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Michael Sabattis
Court: Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 10 February 2012
Procedural Posture: Criminal / Trial Judgment
Outcome: Convicted on counts under s.145(3) and s.145(5.1); acquitted of robbery (s.344/343(a)).
Legal Topics: Robbery, Threats, Actus Reus, Mens Rea, Intoxication, Recognizance Breach, Undertaking Breach, Video Evidence
Source Language: English

Criminal Law Evidence Robbery Threats Actus Reus Mens Rea Intoxication Recognizance Breach +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Michael Sabattis

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the accused's words/actions conveyed a threat under s.343(a) of the Criminal Code
2 Whether the accused intended that his statement convey a threat (mens rea)
3 Whether the accused's intoxication negated the requisite intent

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Convicted on counts under s.145(3) and s.145(5.1); acquitted of robbery (s.344/343(a)).

Orders

Conviction entered for failure to comply with Recognizance contrary to s.145(3) of the Criminal Code.
Conviction entered for failure to comply with Undertaking contrary to s.145(5.1) of the Criminal Code.