R. v. Caccamo, (1975) 4 N.R. 133 (SCC)

• Judge: Beetz and de Grandpré, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court of Canada
• Case Date: June 24, 1974
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1975), 4 N.R. 133 (SCC);21 CCC (2d) 257;[1975] SCJ No 58 (QL);[1976] 1 SCR 786;4 NR 133;1975 CanLII 11 (SCC);54 DLR (3d) 685

R. v. Caccamo (1975), 4 N.R. 133 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Caccamo

Indexed As: R. v. Caccamo

Supreme Court of Canada

Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Judson,

Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson,

Beetz and de Grandpré, JJ.

March 7, 1975.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge of possession of a pistol for a purpose dangerous to the public contrary to s. 83 of the Criminal Code. Police officers searched the residence of the accused and found a document which outlined a type of constitution for a criminal organization. In addition, the accused was found in possession of six ten dollar counterfeit bills and $1,713 in cash. The trial judge inferred that the accused was a member of a criminal organization and therefore had possession of the pistol for a purpose dangerous to the public peace. The trial judge convicted the accused.

On appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed and the conviction of the accused was affirmed - see 11 C.C.C.(2d) 249; [1973] 2 O.R. 367.

On appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal was affirmed. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trial judge properly inferred that the accused was a member of a criminal organization and therefore had possession of the pistol for a purpose dangerous to the public peace - see paragraphs 10 to 19 and 66 to 69.

Laskin, C.J.C. and Spence, J., dissenting, in the Supreme Court of Canada, would have allowed the appeal and would have directed an acquittal of the accused because the Crown did not prove that the accused had possession of the document which outlined a type of constitution for a criminal organization - see paragraphs 59 to 65. In addition, Laskin, C.J.C. and Spence, J., stated that even if the accused had possession of the document it was not admissible to prove the possession of the pistol by the accused for a purpose dangerous to the public peace.

Evidence - Topic 209

Inferences - Inference from possession of a document - Criminal law - Charge of possession of a pistol for a purpose dangerous to the public - The accused was in possession of a document which outlined a type of constitution for a criminal organization - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trial judge properly inferred that the accused was a member of a criminal organization and therefore had possession of the pistol for a purpose dangerous to the public peace - See paragraphs 10 to 19 and 66 to 69.

Evidence - Topic 2414

Presumptions - Possession and control of matrimonial residence - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the law presumes that a husband is in possession and control of the premises where a husband and wife reside - See paragraph 12.

Criminal Law - Topic 3578

Preliminary inquiry - Evidence - Evidence required to be presented by the Crown - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the Crown at a preliminary inquiry had the discretion to present only that evidence which establishes a prima facie case - See paragraph 20.

Criminal Law - Topic 4485

Procedure - Trial - Adjournments - New evidence - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that where the Crown offers new evidence at trial which takes the accused by surprise, the accused is entitled to adjournment - See paragraph 23.

Criminal Law - Topic 4505

Procedure - Trial - Miscarriage of justice - Special duties of the Crown - Duty of the Crown to disclose evidence prior to trial - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Crown did not have a duty to inform the defence of the existence of documentary evidence prior to trial - See paragraphs 19 to 30 and 46 to 55.

Criminal Law - Topic 5871

Sentence - Charge of possession of a dangerous weapon (Criminal Code, s. 83) - Adult male - The Supreme Court of Canada did not disturb a sentence of imprisonment of six months.

Words and Phrases

Miscarriage of justice - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed the meaning of the phrase "miscarriage of justice" in the Criminal Law - See paragraphs 19 to 30 and 46 to 55.

Cases Noticed:

The Queen v. Caouette, [1973] S.C.R. 859, folld. [para. 7].

Parnerkar v. The Queen, [1974] S.C.R. 449, folld. [para. 7].

Steinberg v. The King, [1931] S.C.R. 421, folld. [para. 8].

Rex v. Hederson, 81 C.C.C. 139 (B.C.C.A.), folld. [para. 12].

Rex v. Mandzuk, 85 C.C.C. 158 (B.C.C.A.), folld. [para. 12].

Regina v. Tokarek, [1967] 3 C.C.C. 114 (B.C.C.A.), folld. [para. 12].

Thompson v. The King, [1918] A.C. 221, folld. [para. 15].

Picken v. The King, [1938] S.C.R. 457, folld. [para. 16].

Emkeit v. The Queen, [1974] S.C.R. 133, dist. [para. 17].

The Queen v. Wray, [1971] S.C.R. 272, folld. [para. 19].

Patterson v. The Queen, [1970] S.C.R. 409, folld. [para. 20].

Rex v. Epping (1973), 57 Cr. App. R. 499, folld. [para. 20].

Lemay v. The King, [1952] 1 S.C.R. 232, folld. [para. 22].

Regina v. Boucher et al., [1963] 2 C.C.C. 241, folld. [para. 30].

Regina v. Cipolla, [1965] 2 O.R. 673, folld. [para. 30].

Regina v. Greenlaw (No. 1), [1968] 3 C.C.C. 200, folld. [para. 30].

South Staffordshire Water Company v. Sharman, [1896] 2 Q.B. 44, folld. [para. 62].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 3(4) [para. 63].

Counsel:

A. Maloney, Q.C., for the appellant;

A. Campbell, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of Canada on June 24, 1974. Judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court of Canada on March 7, 1975 and the following opinions were filed:

de GRANDPRE, J. - see paragraphs 1 to 31.

SPENCE, J. - see paragraphs 32 to 70.

MARTLAND, JUDSON, RITCHIE, PIGEON, DICKSON and BEETZ, JJ., concurred with de GRANDPRE, J.

LASKIN, C.J.C., concurred with SPENCE, J.