R. v. Bilodeau (M.J.), (2005) 219 B.C.A.C. 261 (CA)

• Judge: Rowles, Saunders and Thackray, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: October 05, 2005
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2005), 219 B.C.A.C. 261 (CA);2005 BCCA 618

R. v. Bilodeau (M.J.) (2005), 219 B.C.A.C. 261 (CA);

    361 W.A.C. 261

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JA.021

Regina (respondent) v. Martial Joseph Bilodeau (appellant)

(CA032623; 2005 BCCA 618)

Indexed As: R. v. Bilodeau (M.J.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Rowles, Saunders and Thackray, JJ.A.

December 14, 2005.

Summary:

The accused was charged with two counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at 2004 BCPC 440, convicted the accused. The accused appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1391.2

Motor vehicles - Dangerous driving - Causing death or bodily harm - Just after midnight, the accused's vehicle travelled into the oncoming lane of traffic, collided head-on with another vehicle and caused bodily harm to the occupants of the other vehicle - The accused had driven down a long downhill grade with a sharp curve in the road just prior to where the collision occurred - There were a number of warning signs giving notice of the nature of the upcoming curve, including speed advisory signs - A victim testified that the accused's vehicle was traveling exceptionally faster than other vehicles normally travelling on that road - The road was dry and clear - Traffic was light - The accused was an experienced driver but had little familiarity with the road - Drivers routinely sped in the area - There had been several accidents in the area - The trial judge convicted the accused of two counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm - The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the accused's appeal - The convictions were not unreasonable - The trial judge did not erroneously shift the burden of proof by requiring the accused to provide an explanation for why he was on the other side of the road when the collision occurred.

Criminal Law - Topic 1395

Motor vehicles - Dangerous driving - Evidence and proof - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1391.2 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Hundal (S.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 867; 149 N.R. 189; 22 B.C.A.C. 241; 38 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. S.M.B., 2004 BCCA 98, dist. [para. 31].

R. v. M.S. (2002), 160 O.A.C. 184; 4 C.R.(6th) 157; 24 M.V.R.(4th) 165 (C.A.), affd. [2003] 1 S.C.R. 125; 301 N.R. 196; 170 O.A.C. 82, dist. [para. 31].

R. v. Kewaquado (S.D.J.), [2001] O.J. No. 6063 (Sup. Ct.), affd. [2003] O.A.C. Uned. 202 (C.A.), dist. [para. 31].

R. v. Fotti, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 31 N.R. 100; 2 Man.R.(2d) 180, affing. (1978), 2 Man.R.(2d) 182; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Morin (K.M.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 286; 142 N.R. 141; 131 A.R. 81; 25 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Cassidy, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 345; 100 N.R. 321; 36 O.A.C. 1; 50 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Brausse (I.A.) (1992), 19 B.C.A.C. 1; 34 W.A.C. 1; 44 M.V.R.(2d) 74 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Reed (R.R.) (1997), 86 B.C.A.C. 111; 142 W.A.C. 111; 124 C.C.C.(3d) 258 (C.A.), affd. [1998] 1 S.C.R. 753; 225 N.R. 81; 106 B.C.A.C. 142; 172 W.A.C. 142; 124 C.C.C.(3d) 257, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Johnson (K.C.) (2004), 197 B.C.A.C. 17; 323 W.A.C. 17; 48 M.V.R.(4th) 32; 2004 BCCA 141, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Burke (J.) (No. 3), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 474; 194 N.R. 247; 139 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 147; 433 A.P.R. 147, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Biniaris (J.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 381; 252 N.R. 204; 134 B.C.A.C. 161; 219 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 15, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Braich (A.) et al., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 903; 285 N.R. 162; 164 B.C.A.C. 1; 268 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 27, refd to. [para. 43].

Counsel:

K.J. Gillett, for the appellant;

B.H. Johnstone, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on October 5, 2005, before Rowles, Saunders and Thackray, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Rowles, J.A., delivered the following judgment on December 14, 2005.