R. v. Churla (R.E.), (1991) 1 B.C.A.C. 110 (CA)
| Judge | Southin, Cumming and Hinds, JJ.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
| Case Date | June 03, 1991 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110 (CA) |
R. v. Churla (R.E.) (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110 (CA);
1 W.A.C. 110
MLB headnote and full text
R. (respondent) v. Rustin Edward Churla (appellant)
(CA013261)
Indexed As: R. v. Churla (R.E.)
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Southin, Cumming and Hinds, JJ.A.
June 3, 1991.
Summary:
The accused was convicted of driving while his blood-alcohol content exceeded the legal limit, contrary to s. 253(b) of the Criminal Code. The accused appealed.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Criminal Law - Topic 4683
Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Reasons for judgment - Whether required - The accused was convicted of driving while his blood-alcohol content exceeded the legal limit - The trial judge simply said "I would find the accused guilty under s. 253(b)" and gave no reasons for his decision - The accused appealed, arguing that the lack of reasons showed that the trial judge did not pay proper mind to the evidence - The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, stating that it was open to a trial judge to say at the end of a case simply that "I find the accused guilty or not guilty".
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Harper, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 2; 40 N.R. 255, refd to. [para. 4].
R. v. Hay (1990), 25 M.V.R.(2d) 121 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 253(b).
Counsel:
R. Buddenhagen, for the appellant;
E. Bennett, for the Crown.
This appeal was heard before Southin, Cumming and Hinds, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The following decision of the court was delivered orally on June 3, 1991, by Southin, J.A.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. Barriault (J.M.), (1993) 28 B.C.A.C. 241 (CA)
...R. v. Morin (K.M.) (1992), 142 N.R. 141; 131 A.R. 81; 25 W.A.C. 81; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 24]. R. v. Churla (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110; 1 W.A.C. 110 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24]. R. v. Keshane (L.) (1992), 11 B.C.A.C. 86; 22 W.A.C. 86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25]. R. v. V.K.......
-
R. v. R.A.L., [1999] B.C.T.C. Uned. 263 (SC)
...an error of law is manifest in the reasons of the learned trial judge: R. v. Burns (1994), 89 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (S.C.C.), R. v. Churla (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110 (B.C.C.A.) and R. v. Manji [1995] B.C.J. (Q.L.) No. 1059 (B.C.C.A.). [15] I am satisfied that there is nothing in the reasons of the le......
-
R. v. Barriault (J.M.), (1993) 28 B.C.A.C. 241 (CA)
...R. v. Morin (K.M.) (1992), 142 N.R. 141; 131 A.R. 81; 25 W.A.C. 81; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 24]. R. v. Churla (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110; 1 W.A.C. 110 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24]. R. v. Keshane (L.) (1992), 11 B.C.A.C. 86; 22 W.A.C. 86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25]. R. v. V.K.......
-
R. v. R.A.L., [1999] B.C.T.C. Uned. 263 (SC)
...an error of law is manifest in the reasons of the learned trial judge: R. v. Burns (1994), 89 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (S.C.C.), R. v. Churla (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 110 (B.C.C.A.) and R. v. Manji [1995] B.C.J. (Q.L.) No. 1059 (B.C.C.A.). [15] I am satisfied that there is nothing in the reasons of the le......