Canada Case Law

R. v. Skiffington

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court treated the ministerial referral as a new appeal under Part XXI, granted leave to cross-examine specified affiants and ordered attendance of identified non-affiant police officers because ambiguity and conflicts in the materials justified further inquiry and cross-examination in the interests of justice; the appellant's sworn affidavit may, if admitted as fresh evidence, be used to prove factual non-disclosure and to show whether the absence of a Hart voir dire prejudiced the appellant (i.e. whether he would likely have challenged the Mr. Big admissions and testified), but the affid…

Source excerpt

• Ministerial reference
• Mr. big operations
• Fresh evidence
• Cross-examination of affiants and compellable non-affiants
• Disclosure/non-disclosure
• Abuse of process

Read case analysis

R. v. Volk

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found Damian Volk guilty of assaulting a detainee at the Langley RCMP detachment, holding that the boot strike and cell-search force were not objectively reasonable.

• Assault
• Section 25(1) defence
• Objective reasonableness
• Searches of detainees
• Police supervision and command responsibility
• Use-of-force

Read case analysis

R. v. Volk

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court convicted a Staff Sergeant of assault after finding a takedown of a detained suspect was not objectively reasonable or proportionate under s. 25.

• Use of force by peace officers
• Assault
• Defence under s.25 criminal code
• Self-defence (s.34) principles
• Circumstantial evidence
• Credibility/w(d) analysis

Read case analysis

R. v. Babbington

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court concluded the trial judge did not err: the May 8, 2017 statement was voluntary under Oickle and Sinclair principles; the jury directions on planning and deliberation were adequate and appropriately avoided factual examples; the treatment of prior consistent statements complied with evidentiary rules; and identification directions were sufficient given compelling video and distinctive clothing evidence—therefore the conviction was upheld.

Source excerpt

• Voluntariness of statement
• Right to counsel (second request)
• Planning and deliberation (first degree murder)
• Prior consistent statements and credibility
• Eyewitness and in‑dock identification
• Jury instructions

Read case analysis

R. v. Dergez

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed Blake Everett Dergez’s conviction appeal and sentence appeal, upholding findings that he deliberately doused a police officer with gasoline and issued threats.

• Assault with a weapon
• Uttering threats
• Abuse of process
• Totality principle
• Credibility and reliability of witnesses
• Pre-trial custody credit

Read case analysis

R. v. Amin

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge erred in law by admitting the appellant's "murder advice" to prove identity without applying Handy's high threshold for identity evidence and by failing to warn the jury about the special dangers and limited use of bad act evidence; the judge also failed to properly assess reliability under Hart; those errors created a real risk of wrongful conviction, therefore the conviction was quashed and a new trial ordered.

Source excerpt

• Mr. big operations
• Similar fact evidence
• Identity evidence
• Confession admissibility
• Hart (2014)
• Handy (2002)

Read case analysis

R. v. Senior

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge correctly applied entrapment law, made permissible factual findings that police conduct did not constitute inducement and that opportunities created were not sufficiently proximate to the offences; those findings are supported by the record and entitled to deference, therefore the convictions and sentence are upheld and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Entrapment/inducement
• Opportunity branch of entrapment
• Undercover operations
• Abuse of process
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Dergez

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court acquitted the accused of five assault-with-a-weapon counts, but convicted him of uttering threats and assaulting a police officer after a laser-related confrontation and arrest.

• Assault with a weapon
• Assaulting a police officer
• Uttering threats
• Self‑defence
• Abuse of process
• Charter s.7

Read case analysis

Knight v. British Columbia (Public Safety)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Most of the plaintiff’s interlocutory requests were refused; the court ordered only written opening statements before trial and costs against the plaintiff.

• Eviction
• Discovery and disclosure
• Transcripts and dars recordings
• Self-represented litigant conduct
• Pre-trial directions
• Costs

Read case analysis

R. v. Braithwaite

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Because Ramelson supplied new, more detailed parameters for assessing online sting operations and the appellate record is insufficient to determine whether those parameters were met, the appellant must be allowed to litigate entrapment in the trial court; the Crown was not shown to be procedurally prejudiced by this course, so the conviction was quashed and a new trial limited to the entrapment/stay motion was ordered.

Source excerpt

• Child luring
• Entrapment
• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Internet sting operations
• Publication ban

Read case analysis