R. v. Brydon (J.L.), (1995) 55 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA)

• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Judge: McEachern, C.J.B.C., Wood, Gibbs, Goldie and Rowles, JJ.A.
• Citation: (1995), 55 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA)
• Date: 03 February 1995
• Subject Matter: CRIMINAL LAW

R. v. Brydon (J.L.) (1995), 55 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA);

    90 W.A.C. 6

MLB headnote and full text

Regina (respondent) v. James Lee Brydon (appellant)

(CA014886)

Indexed As: R. v. Brydon (J.L.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

McEachern, C.J.B.C., Wood, Gibbs, Goldie and Rowles, JJ.A.

February 3, 1995.

Summary:

The accused appealed from conviction on five counts of sexual assault.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, Wood, J.A., dissenting in the result, dis­missed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 4351

Procedure - Jury charge - Direction re­garding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - The British Columbia Court of Appeal reviewed various instructions to juries on both reasonable doubt and the reasonable doubt standard of proof - See paragraphs 36 to 112, 141.

Criminal Law - Topic 4351

Procedure - Jury charge - Direction re­garding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - The British Columbia Court of Appeal set out a model jury charge on reasonable doubt - See paragraphs 113 to 123, 141.

Criminal Law - Topic 4351

Procedure - Jury charge - Direction re­garding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - A jury charge on reasonable doubt was entirely satisfactory - See paragraphs 26 to 27, 129 - The jury requested a fur­ther definition of reasonable doubt and moral certainty - In his recharge the judge stated: "If you believe the accused is prob­ably guilty or likely guilty but still have a reasonable doubt, you must give the bene­fit of that doubt to the accused" - The judge further stated: "... you may be left with a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. If you are unanimous in that doubt you must give the benefit of that doubt to the accused" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that neither statement would have misled the jury - See paragraphs 27 to 35, 130 to 140.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Tyhurst (J.S.) (1992), 21 B.C.A.C. 218; 37 W.A.C. 218; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 238 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 146].

R. v. Vaillancourt, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 636; 81 N.R. 115; 10 Q.A.C. 161; 68 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 281; 209 A.P.R. 281; 60 C.R.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Sears (1948), 90 C.C.C. 159 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Burdick (1975), 27 C.C.C.(2d) 497 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Campbell (1977), 38 C.C.C.(2d) 6 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 14, 166].

R. v. Gordon (1983), 4 C.C.C.(3d) 492 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Hopt v. Utah (1887), 120 U.S. 430, refd to. [para. 14].

Commonwealth v. Kloiber (1954), 106 A. 2d 820 (Pa.), cert. denied (1954), 348 U.S. 875, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Onufrejczyk, [1955] 1 All E.R. 247 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Conley (1982), 30 S.A.S.R. 226 (S.C. in banco), refd to. [para. 14].

United States v. Drake (1982), 673 F.2d 15 (1st Cir.), refd to. [para. 14].

United States v. Del Toro Soto (1982), 676 F.2d 13 (1st Cir.), refd to. [para. 14].

United States v. DeWolf (1982), 696 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), refd to. [para. 14].

Victor v. Nebraska; Sandoval v. California (1994), 127 L.Ed. 583 (U.S. Neb.)(U.S.S.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

State v. Cohen (1899), 78 N.W. 857 (Iowa), refd to. [para. 15].

Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, refd to. [para. 35].

Sullivan v. Louisiana, [1993] W.L. 179275, refd to. [para. 35].

Colpitts v. R., [1965] S.C.R. 739, refd to. [para. 35].

State v Sauer (1883), 38 N.W. 355 (Minn.), refd to. [para. 41].

Owens v. Commonwealth (1947), 43 S.E. 2d 895 (Va.), refd to. [para. 41].

Smith v. Butler (1988), 696 F. Supp. 748 (D. Mass.), affd. (1989), 879 F.2d 853 (1st Cir.), cert. denied (1989), 493 U.S. 895, refd to. [para. 41].

United States v. Dale (1993), 991 F.2d 819 (D.C. Cir.), refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Huenemann (D.C.) (1993), 38 B.C.A.C. 20; 62 W.A.C. 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

Dunn v. Perrin (1978), 570 F.2d 21 (1st Cir.), cert. denied (1978), 437 U.S. 910, refd to. [para. 45].

Stafford v. Director of Public Prosecutions; Luvaglio v. Director of Public Prosecu­tions (1968), 55 Cr. App. Rep. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Ching (Yap Chuan) (1976), 63 Cr. App. Rep. 7 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

Green v. R. (1971), 126 C.L.R. 28 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Wilson (1986), 42 S.A.S.R. 203 (S.C. in banco), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Pahuja (1987), 30 A. Crim. R. 118 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

Commonwealth v. Webster (1850), 59 Mass. 295, refd to. [para. 57].

People v. Strong (1866), 30 Cal. 151, refd to. [para. 58].

Commonwealth v. Holt (1944), 39 A. 2d 372 (P.A.), refd to. [para. 60].

Cage v. Louisiana (1990), 498 U.S. 39, refd to. [para. 64].

Miler v. Ministry of Pensions, [1947] 2 All E.R. 372, refd to. [para. 70].

R. v. LaChance, [1963] 2 C.C.C. 14 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Figueira (1981), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 409 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Summers, [1952] 1 All E.R. 1059 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74].

R. v. Hepworth and Fearnley, [1955] 2 Q.B. 600 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74].

R. v. Livingston (D.) (1985), 39 Sask.R. 45; 46 C.R.(3d) 50 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74].

R. v. Rose (A.) (1992), 20 B.C.A.C. 7; 35 W.A.C. 7 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77].

R. v. Olbey (1971), 4 C.C.C.(2d) 103 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 82].

Burrows v. R. (1937), 58 C.L.R. 249 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 82].

United States. v. Christy (1971), 444 F.2d 448 (6th Cir.), cert. denied (1971), 404 U.S. 949, refd to. [para. 82].

United States v. Muckenstrum (1975), 515 F.2d 568 (5th Cir.), cert. denied (1975), 423 U.S. 1032, refd to. [para. 82].

Taylor v. Kentucky (1978), 436 U.S. 478, refd to. [para. 82].

State v. Coe (1984), 684 P.2d 668 (Wash.), refd to. [para. 82].

R. v. Maxwell (1975), 26 C.C.C.(2d) 322 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 83].

Green v. R. (1971), 126 C.L.R. 28 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 83].

Boucher v. R., [1955] S.C.R. 16, refd to. [para. 84].

R. v. Hrynwk (1949), 93 C.C.C. 100 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Brown v. R. (1913), 17 C.L.R. 570 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 91].

Walters v. R., [1969] 2 A.C. 26 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 92].

R. v. Gray (1973), 58 Cr. App. Rep. 177 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 92].

Bishop v. United States (1939), 107 F.2d 297 (D.C. Cir.), refd to. [para. 93].

United States v. Morris (1981), 647 F.2d 568 (5th Cir.), refd to. [para. 93].

United States v. Fallen (1974), 498 F.2d 172 (8th Cir.), refd to. [para. 93].

United States v. Stubin (1971), 446 F.2d 457 (3d Cir.), refd to. [para. 93].

Holland v. United States (1954), 348 U.S. 121 (U.S.S.C.), refd to. [para. 93].

United States v. Drake (1982), 673 F.2d 15 (1st Cir.), refd to. [para. 98].

R. v. Speakman (1989), 5 C.R.N.Z. 250 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 100].

R. v. Brown (1990), 5 C.R.N.Z. 606 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 100].

United States v. Larson (1978), 581 F.2d 664 (7th Cir.), refd to. [para. 100].

R. v. Bouvier (1984), 1 O.A.C. 302; 11 C.C.C.(3d) 257 (C.A.), affd. [1985] 2 S.C.R. 485; 64 N.R. 321; 11 O.A.C. 185, refd to. [para. 103].

Thomas v. R. (1960), 102 C.L.R. 584 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Finlay and Grellette (1985), 11 O.A.C. 279; 23 C.C.C.(3d) 48 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 110].

R. v. Cooper, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 860; 14 N.R. 181; 34 C.C.C.(2d) 18, refd to. [para. 111].

Hodge's Case (1838), 2 Lewin 227; 168 E.R. 1136, refd to. [para. 111].

R. v. Canute (S.F.) (1993), 25 B.C.A.C. 277; 43 W.A.C. 277; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 403 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 113].

R. v. Malanik (1951), 101 C.C.C. 182 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 127].

R. v. Lewis (1979), 27 N.R. 451; 47 C.C.C.(2d) 24 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 127].

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 397; 3 C.R.(4th) 302, refd to. [para. 134].

R. v. Wong (K.H.) (1992), 12 B.C.A.C. 211; 24 W.A.C. 211 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 137].

R. v. Laisa (1993), N.W.T.R. 199 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 166].

R. v. Kent (H.M.) (1994), 171 N.R. 231; 134 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 383 A.P.R. 81 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 168].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 686(1)(b)(iii) [para. 35].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Ball, V.C., The Moment of Truth: Prob­ability Theory and Standards of Proof (1961), 14 Vanderbuilt Law Review 807, generally [para. 14].

Bates, F., Describing the Indescribable - Evaluating the Standard of Proof in Criminal Cases (1986), 13 Crim. L.J. 330, generally [para. 14].

Criminal Jury Instructions, Vol 1 (2nd Ed. 1993), Vancouver: Continuing Legal Edu­cation Society of British Columbia, para. 4.04(1) [para. 39].

Federal Judicial Center's Committee to Study Criminal Jury Instructions Report (1987), p. 28 [para. 108].

Judicial Studies Board, Jury Instructions (1991), pp. 3-2, 4-426 [para. 175].

Subcommittee on Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions Report (1987), p. 29 [para. 94].

Shapiro, To A Moral Certainty: Theories of Knowl­edge and Anglo-American Juries -- 1600 to 1850 (1986), 38 Hastings L.J. 153, generally [para. 106].

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (3rd Ed. 1973) [para. 158].

Stiffert, John F., Instructing on the Burden of Proof and Reasonable Doubt (1987), 8 Bridgeport Law Review 365 [para. 14].

Wigmore on Evidence, Vol. IX (Chad­bourn Revision) (1983), para. 2497, pp. 414 to 415 [para. 19].

Wilson, J.O., A Book for Judges (1980), p. 111 [para. 151].

Counsel:

R.C.C. Peck, Q.C., for the appellant;

Elizabeth Bennett, Q.C., for the respon­dent.

This appeal was heard in Vancouver, British Columbia, on November 15 and 16, 1993, before McEachern, C.J.B.C., Wood, Gibbs, Goldie and Rowles, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered on February 3, 1995, and the following opinions were filed:

Wood, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 125;

McEachern, C.J.B.C. (Goldie and Rowles, JJ.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 126 to 143;

Gibbs, J.A. - see paragraphs 144 to 191.