R. v. Crouse (L.B.), 2002 NSPC 9

JudgeCrawford, P.C.J.
CourtProvincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
Case DateNovember 17, 2000
JurisdictionNova Scotia
Citations2002 NSPC 9;(2000), 204 N.S.R.(2d) 108 (ProvCt)

R. v. Crouse (L.B.) (2000), 204 N.S.R.(2d) 108 (ProvCt);

 639 A.P.R. 108

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.050

Her Majesty The Queen v. Larry Beverley Crouse

(Nos. 988274; 988275; 988276; 988278; 988279; 988280; 2002 NSPC 9)

Indexed As: R. v. Crouse (L.B.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Crawford, P.C.J.

December 13, 2000.


The accused was charged with a number of criminal offences respecting terrorizing be­haviour towards an ex-girlfriend he was to have no contact with. The charges included uttering a death threat, impaired driving, breach of probation, breach of a recogni­zance, break and enter and mischief. The accused pleaded lack of criminal responsi­bility due to mental disorder (Criminal Code, s. 16).

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court ac­quitted the accused of uttering a death threat and impaired driving. Those offences were not proved by the Crown. Although the Crown proved the required elements for the remaining offences, the court found the ac­cused not criminally responsible due to men­tal disorder.

Criminal Law - Topic 97

General principles - Mental disorder - In­sanity, automatism, etc. - What consti­tutes "insanity" (incl. "not criminally re­sponsible due to mental disorder") - The accused was charged with a number of criminal of­fences respecting terrorizing behaviour towards an ex-girlfriend he was to have no contact with - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found the accused not criminally responsible due to mental dis­order (Crimi­nal Code, s. 16) - The accused suffered a major depressive disorder with intense ob­sessive preoccupation with his ex-girl­friend - The court stated that "it was a case where his impulse or obsession impaired his ability to rationally assess, define or evalu­ate his behaviour in light of the rele­vant public standards of wrong to such an ex­tent that he lacked the capacity for ratio­nality. In other words ... the [ac­c­used's] mental disorder ... made him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his actions or of knowing that they were wrong." - See paragraphs 38 to 44.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Cooper, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1149; 31 N.R. 234; 110 D.L.R.(3d) 46; 18 C.R.(3d) 138; 51 C.C.C.(2d) 129; 4 L. Med. Q. 227; 1979 CarswellOnt 60, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Rooney (J.J.) (1995), 126 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 68; 393 A.P.R. 68; 1995 CarswellPEI 86 (P.E.I.S.C.), refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Oommen (M.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 507; 168 N.R. 200; 155 A.R. 190; 73 W.A.C. 190; 19 Alta. L.R.(3d) 305; 30 C.R.(4th) 195; [1994] 7 W.W.R. 49; 91 C.C.C.(3d) 8; 1994 CarswellAlta 121, refd to. [para. 42].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 16 [para. 38].


Anthony Brown, for the Crown;

Alan Ferrier, for the accused.

This case was heard on November 17, 2000, at Bridgewater, N.S., before Crawford, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on December 13, 2000.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT