Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Ontario Court of Appeal allowed both appeals in a murder case, holding that improper resemblance evidence, flawed W.(D.) instructions, and an improper closing warranted new trials.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Saboon’s appeal, allowed Morrison’s appeal, substituted manslaughter for murder, and imposed a 14-month sentence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Jim Hosang’s appeal, upholding admission of a loaded firearm after finding no s. 8 breach, a s. 10(b) breach, and no basis to exclude the evidence.
The Supreme Court of Canada restored B.F.’s attempted-murder conviction for her mother and upheld the convictions involving the child, finding no instructional error.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed conviction appeals in a murder-kidnapping case, upholding reliance on a Vetrovec witness and rejecting W.(D.) and reasons challenges.
The charge on modes of participation was constitutionally defective: the s.21(2) instruction left the jury potentially confused about whether common unlawful purpose could ground first‑degree murder and the aiding instruction failed to explain the necessary intention and knowledge for an aider, producing a real risk of convicting without understanding requisite mens rea; accordingly convictions were set aside and a new trial ordered.
Source excerpt
The accused was guilty of manslaughter because he planned and participated in a group assault that significantly contributed to the deceased's death; a reasonable person in his circumstances would have foreseen a risk of non‑trivial bodily harm from the group assault (and from the presence/use of knives once he knew or believed others had them); intervening acts by MP and CP did not break the causal chain; abandonment failed because he did not provide timely, unequivocal communication or take reasonable steps to neutralize his prior participation.
Source excerpt
The Court held the trial judge did not err: the jury instructions adequately explained that constructive first degree murder under s.231(5) requires the accused to have actively participated (i.e., been a substantial cause) in the killing; forcible confinement and sexual assault were properly left to the jury on the evidence; post-offence conduct testified to by Beak was admissible and properly cautioned as circumstantial; the judge correctly exercised discretion by declining a premature pre-ruling on jailhouse informant evidence; and the judge's specific corrective instruction cured any prej…
Source excerpt
The trial judge did not err: excluding the appellant's prior statements to his first lawyer was a proper discretionary ruling on probative value versus prejudice; there was an evidentiary basis to instruct the jury on constructive first degree murder under s.231(5) given kidnapping by fraud and the appellant's active role in delivering and confining the victim; and the charge, read as a whole, adequately instructed the jury on the factual findings required for s.231(5).
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court of British Columbia refused extradition committal for James Ellingson, finding the certified record too sparse to support an inference linking him to Silk Road drug sales.
Explore more
