R. v. Arcangioli (G.), (1994) 162 N.R. 280 (SCC)
Judge | Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court of Canada |
Case Date | Thursday January 27, 1994 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (1994), 162 N.R. 280 (SCC);1994 CanLII 107 (SCC);22 WCB (2d) 144;69 OAC 26;27 CR (4th) 1;[1994] 1 SCR 129;162 NR 280;[1994] SCJ No 5 (QL);[1994] ACS no 5;111 DLR (4th) 48;87 CCC (3d) 289;JE 94-241 |
R. v. Arcangioli (G.) (1994), 162 N.R. 280 (SCC)
MLB headnote and full text
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
....................
Giuseppe Arcangioli (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)
(23380)
Indexed As: R. v. Arcangioli (G.)
Supreme Court of Canada
Lamer, C.J.C., Sopinka, Gonthier,
Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and
Major, JJ.
January 27, 1994.
Summary:
The accused was convicted of aggravated assault following a jury trial and was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. The accused appealed against conviction.
The Ontario Court of Appeal, Galligan, J.A., dissenting, dismissed the appeal. The accused appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.
Criminal Law - Topic 4393
Procedure - Jury charge - Failure of counsel to object - Effect of - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "trial counsel's failure to object to a jury charge is not determinative of the applicability of the Criminal Code's 'curative provision', s. 618(1)(b)(iii)" - See paragraph 38.
Criminal Law - Topic 5035
Appeals - Indictable offences - Dismissal of appeal if error resulted in no miscarriage of justice - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4393].
Criminal Law - Topic 5211
Evidence - Witnesses - Admissibility and relevancy - Flight of accused - An accused convicted of aggravated assault (stabbing) admitted common assault, but claimed a third party stabbed the victim - The accused fled the scene - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that it was not sufficient to instruct the jury that innocent men sometimes flee the crime scene - The trial judge should have directed the jury that the accused's flight was equally consistent with common assault as with aggravated assault - Fleeing the scene was, accordingly, incapable of supporting an inference of consciousness of guilt respecting the aggravated assault charge - There was a danger that the jury could wrongly infer that the accused fled because he was guilty of stabbing the victim - See paragraph 49.
Criminal Law - Topic 5214.8
Evidence - Witnesses - Admissibility and relevancy - That crime committed by another - An accused charged with aggravated assault (stabbing) claimed that a third person did it - The accused adduced evidence (criminal record) that the third person had a propensity for violence and was connected with another stabbing one-half hour before the present stabbing - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the trial judge should have instructed the jury that they could consider the evidence in support of the accused's claim that the third person, not the accused, committed the stabbing - See paragraph 48.
Criminal Law - Topic 5316.1
Evidence - Witnesses - Inferences - Of guilt - From fleeing crime scene - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5211].
Criminal Law - Topic 5419
Evidence - Witnesses - Criminal record - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5214.8].
Criminal Law - Topic 5419.1
Evidence - Witnesses - Character evidence respecting - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the Crown was precluded from adducing evidence of the accused's character unless the accused has put character in issue or the evidence is otherwise relevant (e.g. similar acts) - The evidence "is excluded on the ground that its prejudicial effect is apt to outweigh its probative value; the danger exists that a jury may convict on the basis of the accused's reputation rather than on the basis of the evidence" - The court stated that the rule did not apply to character evidence respecting a third party witness - As long as it was relevant and not otherwise excluded by a rule of evidence, it was admissible - "Courts are reluctant to exclude evidence offered by an accused in his defence" - See paragraphs 25 to 31.
Criminal Law - Topic 5449
Evidence - Witnesses - Testimony respecting the accused - Character of accused - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5419.1].
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Scopelliti (1981), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 481 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].
R. v. McMillan (1975), 23 C.C.C.(2d) 160 (C.A.), affd. [1977] 2 S.C.R. 824; 15 N.R. 20, refd to. [para. 27].
R. v. Williams (1985), 7 O.A.C. 201; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 356 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].
R. v. Yaeck (1991), 50 O.A.C. 29; 68 C.C.C.(3d) 545 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1992] 1 S.C.R. xii; 139 N.R. 240; 56 O.A.C. 160, refd to. [para. 29].
R. v. Seaboyer and Gayme, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577; 128 N.R. 81; 48 O.A.C. 81; 66 C.C.C.(3d) 321, refd to. [para. 30].
R. v. Kendall and McKay (1987), 20 O.A.C. 134; 35 C.C.C.(3d) 105 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].
R. v. Squire, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 13; 10 N.R. 25, refd to. [para. 37].
MacAskill v. R., [1931] S.C.R. 330, refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Chambers (No. 2), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1293; 119 N.R. 321; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 321, refd to. [para. 38].
R. v. Gudmondson (1933), 60 C.C.C. 332 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 40].
United States v. Myers (1977), 550 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir.), refd to. [para. 42].
Colpitts v. R., [1965] S.C.R. 739, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Wildman, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 311; 5 O.A.C. 241; 55 N.R. 27, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. P.L.S., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 909; 122 N.R. 321; 90 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 234; 280 A.P.R. 234; 5 C.R.(4th) 351; 64 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Broyles, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 595; 131 N.R. 118; 120 A.R. 189; 8 W.A.C. 189; 8 C.R.R.(2d) 274; [1992] 1 W.W.R. 289; 9 C.R.(4th) 1; 84 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1; 68 C.C.C.(3d) 308, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. F.F.B., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 697; 148 N.R. 161; 120 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 332 A.P.R. 1, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Bevan and Griffith, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 599; 154 N.R. 245; 64 O.A.C. 165, refd to. [para. 46].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 686(1)(b)(iii) [para. 24].
Authors and Works Noticed:
McCormick on Evidence (Revsd. Ed. 1972), p. 655 [para. 42].
McCormick on Evidence (4th Ed. 1992), vol. 1, p. 811 [para. 26]; vol. 2, p. 182 [para. 39].
Sopinka, J., Lederman, S.N., and Bryant, A.W., The Law of Evidence in Canada (1992), p. 454 [para. 26].
Wigmore on Evidence (3rd Ed. 1940), vol. 1, p. 573 [para. 27].
Counsel:
Clayton C. Ruby, for the appellant;
Jamie C. Klukach, for the respondent.
Solicitors of Record:
Ruby & Edwardh, Toronto, Ontario, for the appellant;
Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on November 12, 1993, before Lamer, C.J.C., Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.
On January 27, 1994, Major, J., delivered the following judgment for the Supreme Court of Canada in both official languages.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
R. v. Douglas (R.D.), (2005) 387 A.R. 1 (QB)
...(1988), 21 O.A.C. 257; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 225; 1987 CarswellOnt 1116 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 221, footnote 65]. R. v. Arcangioli (G.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129; 162 N.R. 280; 69 O.A.C. 26; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 27 C.R.(4th) 1; 1994 CarswellOnt 1151, refd to. [para. 229, footnote 66]. R. v. White (R.G.) ......
-
Reference Re Firearms Act (Can.), 2000 SCC 31
...or authorization that is refused by the Registrar; (c) every transfer of a firearm of which the Registrar is informed under section 26 or 27; (d) every exportation from or importation into Canada of a firearm of which the Registrar is informed under section 42 or 50; (e) every loss, finding......
-
R. v. Bonisteel (R.), (2008) 259 B.C.A.C. 114 (CA)
...v. Scopelliti (1981), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 481 at 493 (Ont. C.A.); Morris v. The Queen , [1983] 2 S.C.R. 190 at 201, 202; R. v. Arcangioli , [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129 at 138-139; R. v. Sims (1994), 87 C.C.C.(3d) 402 at 421 (B.C.C.A.). "Evidence of extrinsic misconduct by an accused, of which so-called s......
-
R. v. White (D.R.), (2011) 300 B.C.A.C. 165 (SCC)
...more likely than the proposition would be in the absence of that evidence'" - See paragraph 36. Cases Noticed: R. v. Arcangioli (G.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129; 162 N.R. 280 ; 69 O.A.C. 26 , dist. [paras. 6, 109, 153]. R. v. White (R.G.) and Côté (Y.), [1998] 2 S.C.R. 72 ; 227 N.R. 326 ; 112......
-
Lindahl Estate et al. v. Olsen et al., (2004) 360 A.R. 310 (QB)
...complainer [see footnote 141]. [231] Grant Lindahl at the de bene esse examination in cross said he had suffered from hemorrhoids since age 26 or 27. He had testified at discovery that he had suffered them from about age 20. He would seek medical attention for ailments depending on how seri......
-
R. v. Yumnu (I.) et al.,
...to. [para. 250]. R. v. Peavoy (D.M.) (1997), 101 O.A.C. 304; 117 C.C.C.(3d) 226 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 252]. R. v. Arcangioli (G.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129; 162 N.R. 280; 69 O.A.C. 26, refd to. [para. 254]. R. v. White (R.G.) and Côté (Y.), [1998] 2 S.C.R. 72; 227 N.R. 326; 112 O.A.C. 1, refd ......
-
R. v. Abdullahi,
...[2009] 1 S.C.R. 423; R. v. G.D.B., 2000 SCC 22, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 520; R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33, [2019] 2 S.C.R. 579; R. v. Arcangioli, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129; R. v. Terezakis, 2007 BCCA 384, 223 C.C.C. (3d) 344; R. v. Williams, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1128. By Côté J. (dissenting) ......
-
R. v. Trochym (S.), (2004) 188 O.A.C. 330 (CA)
...385, refd to. [para. 14]. R. v. S.C.B. (1997), 104 O.A.C. 81; 119 C.C.C.(3d) 530 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. R. v. Arcangioli (G.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129; 162 N.R. 280; 69 O.A.C. 26; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 19]. R. v. Levert (G.) (2001), 150 O.A.C. 208; 159 C.C.C.(3d) 71 (C.A.), r......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (April 27 ' May 1)
...1 S.C.R. 314, R. v. Lavallee, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 852, R. v. S.A.B., 2003 SCC 60, R. v. White, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 72, R. v. Arcangioli, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129, R. v. Gager, 2012 ONSC 2712, R. v. Chiasson, 2009 ONCA 789, R. v. Jeanvenne, 2010 ONCA 706, R. v. Dixon, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 244, R. v. McNeil, 2......
-
Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (December 10 14, 2018)
...Conduct, Probative Value, Identity, Fresh Evidence, Judicial Discretion, Criminal Code, s. 686(1)(a)(iii), R. v. Arcangioli, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129, R. v. S.B.1, 2018 ONCA 807, R. v. Hall, 2010 ONCA 724, R. v. O'Connor (2002), 62 O.R. (3d) 263 (C.A.), Browne v. Dunn (1893), 6 R. 87 (H.L.), R. ......
-
Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (October 8 12, 2018)
...678, R v Vorobiov, 2018 ONCA 448, R v Angelis, 2013 ONCA 70, R v Chambers, 2016 ONCA 684, R v White, [1998] 2 SCR 72, R v Arcangioli, [1994] 1 SCR 129, R v White, 2011 SCC 13, R v Aravena, 2015 ONCA 250, leave to appeal refused, [2015] SCCA No 497, R v Khan, 2007 ONCA 779, R v Handy, 2002 S......
-
Bill 57 And Amendments To The Construction Act
...before October 1, 2019, when adjudication comes into force, if an owner, contractor or subcontractor refuses to make payment under section 26 or 27 of the Act, the contractor or subcontractor to whom payment is owed may refuse to pay out its subcontractor or sub-subcontractor (as the case m......
-
Table of cases
...535 R. v. Arbour (1990), 4 C.R.R. (2d) 369, [1990] O.J. No. 1353 (C.A.) ................. 392 R. v. Arcangioli, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129, 27 C.R. (4th) 1, 87 C.C.C. (3d) 289 ....................................................................... 101, 162, 575 R. v. Archambault (2012), 307 C.C.C.......
-
Table of Cases
...91 ʨraya, R v , 2015 ONCA 854 .................................................. 86 ʨrcangioli, R v , [1994] 1 SCR 129 .............................................. 42 ʩailey, R v , 2016 ONCA 516 .................................................. 39 ʩalafrej c R , 2005 QCCA 18, 197 CCC (3d......
-
Table of Cases
...O.J. No. 1353 (C.A.) ..................................................................................... 361 R. v. Arcangioli, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 129, 27 C.R. (4th) 1, 87 C.C.C. (3d) 28 9, 69 O.A.C. 26, 111 D.L.R. (4th) 48, 162 N.R. 280 .................................. 93, 151 R. v. Arcuri......
-
Character Evidence: Primary Materiality
...And see R v Yaeck (1991), 6 OR (3d) 293 (CA). 263 R v Pilon , 2009 ONCA 248. See also Jackson , above note 262. 264 R v Arcangioli , [1994] 1 SCR 129; Pollock , above note 245 at paras 100–1. 265 R v Khan (2004), 189 CCC (3d) 49 (Ont SCJ). THE L AW OF EVIDENCE 116 used by the jury to infer ......
-
First Nations Elections Act (S.C. 2014, c. 5)
...is guilty of an offence who contravenes(a) section 10; or(b) section 12, paragraph 14(a), (c) or (e), 16(c), (e) or (f) or 20(d) or section 26 or 27.Marginal note:Offences — subsections 13(2) and 21(2)(3) Every person who intentionally contravenes subsection 13(2) or 21(2) is guilty of an ......
-
An Act to amend the Statistics Act (S.C. 2017, c. 31)
...charge or within their jurisdiction.Marginal note:Records28 Every person who is required to transmit any information mentioned in section 26 or 27 shall from day to day make and keep entries and records of the particulars used to respond to requests for information made to them.Marginal not......