R. v. Callihoo (F.M.), (2006) 410 A.R. 290 (PC)

• Judge: Allen, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: November 06, 2006
• Citations: (2006), 410 A.R. 290 (PC);2006 ABPC 347

R. v. Callihoo (F.M.) (2006), 410 A.R. 290 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] A.R. TBEd. DE.118

Her Majesty the Queen v. Feona Marjorie Callihoo (060764701P101001; 2006 ABPC 347)

Indexed As: R. v. Callihoo (F.M.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Allen, P.C.J.

December 6, 2006.

Summary:

The accused was charged with robbery.

The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused not guilty of robbery, but guilty of theft.

Criminal Law - Topic 1722

Offences against property - Robbery - Elements of - The Alberta Provincial Court discussed the similarities and differences between the offence of robbery as set out in s. 343(a) and s. 343(b) of the Criminal Code - The court held, inter alia, that a lesser degree of violence could support a guilty finding under s. 343(a) - The court stated that "Subsection (b) is concerned about preventing gratuitous violence proximate to the theft; it does not require that the gratuitous violence be connected to a purpose of stealing. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that a somewhat substantial degree of violence would be required to constitute 'personal violence' in that subsection. On the other hand, ss. (a) requires that violence be connected in a purposeful manner to the theft, i.e., for the purpose of extorting whatever is stolen or to prevent, or overcome resistance to the stealing. Thus, a lesser degree of violence where the purpose has been proven should be more acceptable because the violence is done for a specific purpose" - See paragraph 82.

Criminal Law - Topic 1722

Offences against property - Robbery - Elements of - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1726 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 1726

Offences against property - Robbery - What constitutes - While a gas station attendant was out of his kiosk, the female accused got out of a truck, entered the kiosk and grabbed cigarettes and cash - The attendant entered and grabbed the accused from behind - The accused struggled and tried to escape from the much larger attendant - She yelled that the attendant was hurting her and she asked him to release her, stating that she would put everything back - As the accused continued to struggle, the attendant moved her to the door of the kiosk - The accused fell to the ground and kicked at the attendant, although none of the kicks landed - She yelled to the truck and her male companion came toward them - The accused and her companion ran to the truck - The attendant grabbed the accused by the belt line, but she was able to escape when the truck drove off - As the attendant ran after the truck he fell and suffered injuries - The accused was charged with robbery based on ss. 343(a) and (b) of the Criminal Code - The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused not guilty of robbery, but guilty of theft - The court held that the accused's actions did not constitute "personal violence" pursuant to s. 343(b) nor "violence or threats of violence" pursuant to s. 343(a) - See paragraphs 1 to 89.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lifchus (W.) (1997), 216 N.R. 215; 118 Man.R.(2d) 218; 149 W.A.C. 218; 118 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. D.W. (1991), 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 397 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Johnson (1977), 35 C.C.C.(2d) 439 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Fergusson, [1962] S.C.R. 229, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Pelletier (1992), 44 Q.A.C. 168; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 438 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Lieberman (1970), 11 C.R.N.S. 168 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Picard (1976), 39 C.C.C.(2d) 57 (Que. Ct. Sess.), consd. [para. 32].

R. v. Daughma, [1989] O.J. No. 1765 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Noonan (S.T.) (2005), 248 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 293; 741 A.P.R. 293 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Crabe (L.C.) (1993), 25 B.C.A.C. 42; 43 W.A.C. 42; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 323 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Trudel (1984), 12 C.C.C.(3d) 342 (Que. C.A.), consd. [para. 40].

Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 559; 287 N.R. 248; 166 B.C.A.C. 1; 271 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 42, refd to. [para. 46].

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. C.D., [2005] 3 S.C.R. 668; 343 N.R. 1; 376 A.R. 258; 360 W.A.C. 258, consd. [para. 47].

R. v. C.D.K. - see R. v. C.D.

R. v. Burden (1973), 11 C.C.C.(2d) 491 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 54].

R. v. Lew (1978), 40 C.C.C.(2d) 140 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].

R. v. Downer (1978), 40 C.C.C.(2d) 532 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 56].

R. v. Oakley (1986), 13 O.A.C. 141; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Sayers and McCoy (1983), 1 O.A.C. 239; 8 C.C.C.(3d) 572 (C.A.), consd. [para. 61].

R. v. Fleury (1984), 57 A.R. 239 (C.A.), consd. [para. 63].

R. v. Malzfewski, [1987] B.C.J. No. 2520 (C.A.), consd. [para. 65].

R. v. Bourassa (P.T.) (2004), 227 N.S.R.(2d) 173; 720 A.P.R. 173; 189 C.C.C.(3d) 438 (C.A.), consd. [para. 68].

R. v. Hodson (B.S.) (2001), 281 A.R. 76; 248 W.A.C. 76 (C.A.), consd. [para. 71].

R. v. Hebert (D.M.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 272; 197 N.R. 277; 77 B.C.A.C. 1; 126 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 91].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 343(a), sect. 343(b) [para. 26].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Statutes (2nd Ed. 1983), p. 87 [para. 46].

Counsel:

P. Michell, for the Crown;

K. Lieslar, for the defendant.

This matter was heard on October 26 and November 6, 2006, before Allen. P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on December 6, 2006.