R. v. Clemente (V.F.), (1994) 168 N.R. 310 (SCC)

• Judge: Iacobucci and Major, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: June 13, 1994
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1994), 168 N.R. 310 (SCC);[1994] 2 SCR 758;24 WCB (2d) 122;1994 CanLII 49 (SCC);[1994] 8 WWR 1;31 CR (4th) 28;91 CCC (3d) 1;168 NR 310;[1994] CarswellMan 152;[1994] SCJ No 50 (QL);[1994] ACS no 50;70 WAC 161;95 Man R (2d) 161

R. v. Clemente (V.F.) (1994), 168 N.R. 310 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Victor Francisco Clemente (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(23931)

Indexed As: R. v. Clemente (V.F.)

Supreme Court of Canada

Lamer, C.J.C., La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé,

Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin,

Iacobucci and Major, JJ.

June 13, 1994.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of uttering threats to cause death or serious bodily harm, contrary to s. 264.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. The accused appealed his conviction.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal, Twaddle, J.A., dissenting, in a decision reported 92 Man.R.(2d) 51; 61 W.A.C. 51, dismissed the appeal. The accused appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1562

Threats - What constitutes - The accused social assistance recipient was convicted for uttering a threat to cause death or serious bodily harm (Criminal Code, s. 264.1(1)(a)) - The accused was advised that his file was being transferred back to a social worker (Jill) he had a conflict with - The accused told another social worker that if his file was transferred he would be forced to kill Jill - The Manitoba Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, where the threats were uttered to the social worker with the intent to intimidate her and to instill fear in her - The court stated that the offence was complete whether or not Jill knew a threat had been made against her - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the conviction.

Criminal Law - Topic 1562

Threats - What constitutes - The accused was charged with uttering a threat to cause death or serious bodily harm (Criminal Code, s. 264.1(1)(a)) - The Supreme Court of Canada stated "[t]o determine if a rea­sonable person would consider that the words were uttered as a threat the court must regard them objectively, and review them in light of the circumstances in which the words were uttered, the manner in which they were spoken and the person to whom they were addressed." - See paragraph 13.

Criminal Law - Topic 1565

Threats - Intention or mens rea - The accused was charged with uttering a threat to cause death or serious bodily harm (Criminal Code, s. 264.1(1)(a)) - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the mens rea for the offence could be framed as either words uttered with the intent to intimidate or instill fear or as a threat uttered with the intent that it be taken seriously - See paragraphs 6 to 8 - "The question of whether the accused had the intent to intimidate, or that his words were meant to be taken seriously will, in the absence of any explanation by the accused, usually be determined by the words used, the context in which they were spoken, and the person to whom they were directed." - See paragraph 9.

Criminal Law - Topic 1565.1

Threats - Actus reus - The accused was charged with uttering a threat to cause death or serious bodily harm (Criminal Code, s. 264.1(1)(a)) - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "... the actus reus of the offence is the uttering of threats of death or serious bodily harm." - See para­graph 12.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. McCraw, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 72; 128 N.R. 299; 49 O.A.C. 47, appld. [para. 9].

Henry v. R. (1981), 24 C.R.(3d) 261 (Ont. C.A.), dist. [para. 11].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 331 [para. 11].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 264.1 [para. 11]; sect. 264.1(1)(a) [paras. 3, 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (3rd Ed. 1987) [para. 7 (Eng.)].

Nouveau Petit Robert, Le (1993) [para. 7 (Fr.)].

Counsel:

Harvey J. Slobodzian, for the appellant;

Rick Saull, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Pullan, Guld, Kammerloch, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the appellant;

Attorney General of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 13, 1994, before Lamer, C.J.C., La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. The court delivered judg­ment on June 13, 1994, with the following reasons for judgment delivered by Cory, J., in both official languages on July 14, 1994.