R. v. D.R.H., 2007 MBCA 136

• Judge: Scott, C.J.M., Monnin and Freedman, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: June 05, 2007
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: 2007 MBCA 136;(2007), 220 Man.R.(2d) 271 (CA)

R. v. D.R.H. (2007), 220 Man.R.(2d) 271 (CA);

      407 W.A.C. 271

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. NO.016

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. H. (D.R.) (accused/appellant)

(AR 07-30-06652; 2007 MBCA 136)

Indexed As: R. v. D.R.H.

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Scott, C.J.M., Monnin and Freedman, JJ.A.

November 8, 2007.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of sexual assault. He appealed his conviction, the principal issue being the adequacy of the identification evidence.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal, Monnin, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and entered an acquittal.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 5250.1

Evidence and witnesses - Identification - Dock identification - The accused was convicted of sexual assault - He appealed, the principal issue being identification - The complainant had just met the accused in a social setting at the time of the offence, but did not know him previously - She had not seen the perpetrator (if it was the accused) for some nine years from the time of the offence until trial - The identification of the accused was made, during trial when he was in court, manacled and sitting between two officers - The victim was admittedly a "little bit dizzy" at the time of the offence from alcohol consumption - The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the verdict was unreasonable - In the dock identification evidence, while not automatically excluded, was entitled to very little weight especially in these circumstances - The only other evidence supporting identification was the complainant's in-court description of her assailant and the circumstantial evidence that the assailant and the accused shared the same name - Neither of those factors had much evidentiary value - On the other hand, the trial judge properly instructed himself regarding the frailties of eyewitness testimony and reviewed the evidence with some care - The court concluded that there were too many unsettling factors to be weighed in the balance which militated against the reasonableness of the identification of the accused by the complainant - See paragraphs 1 to 57.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Sophonow (1985), 38 Man.R.(2d) 198 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 64].

R. v. Braich (A.) et al., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 903; 285 N.R. 162; 164 B.C.A.C. 1; 268 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 27, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Burke (J.) (No. 3), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 474; 194 N.R. 247; 139 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 147; 433 A.P.R. 147, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Willis (R.) (2002), 170 Man.R.(2d) 22; 285 W.A.C. 22; 2002 MBCA 138, affd. [2003] 1 S.C.R. 127; 302 N.R. 65; 173 Man.R.(2d) 166; 293 W.A.C. 166; 2003 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. C.L.Y. (2006), 208 Man.R.(2d) 202; 383 W.A.C. 202; 2006 MBCA 124, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Gagnon (L.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 621; 347 N.R. 355; 2006 SCC 17, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Bigsky (J.S.) (2006), 289 Sask.R. 179; 382 W.A.C. 179; 217 C.C.C.(3d) 441; 2006 SKCA 145, refd to. [paras. 20, 65].

R. v. Quercia (1990), 41 O.A.C. 305; 75 O.R.(2d) 463 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Miaponoose (A.) (1996), 93 O.A.C. 115; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 445 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. T.T. and S.L. (1997), 103 O.A.C. 15; 117 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 35 O.R.(3d) 641 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Dunn (J.L.) (2006), 258 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 779 A.P.R. 1; 2006 PESCAD 19, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Yebes, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 168; 78 N.R. 351, refd to. [paras. 30, 63].

R. v. Biniaris (J.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 381; 252 N.R. 204; 134 B.C.A.C. 161; 219 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 15, refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Sutton, [1970] 2 O.R. 358 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Mezzo, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 802; 68 N.R. 1; 43 Man.R.(2d) 161, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Ali, 2004 ONCJ 170, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Hibbert (K.R.), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 445; 287 N.R. 111; 165 B.C.A.C. 161; 270 W.A.C. 161; 2002 SCC 39, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Bennett (R.E.) (1998), 212 A.R. 154; 168 W.A.C. 154 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Zurowski (D.) (2003), 339 A.R. 233; 312 W.A.C. 233; 2003 ABCA 315 (C.A.), revd. [2004] 3 S.C.R. 509; 328 N.R. 107; 361 A.R. 201; 339 W.A.C. 201; 2004 SCC 72, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Reitsma (S.J.) (1997), 97 B.C.A.C. 303; 157 W.A.C. 303 (C.A.), revd. [1998] 1 S.C.R. 769; 226 N.R. 367; 107 B.C.A.C. 161; 174 W.A.C. 161; 125 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. F.A. (2004), 184 O.A.C. 324 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Williams (1982), 66 C.C.C.(2d) 234 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Chandra (1975), 29 C.C.C.(2d) 570 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Zarubin (G.A.) (2004), 241 Sask.R. 292; 313 W.A.C. 292; 2004 SKCA 14, refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Boudreau (A.) (1987), 81 N.B.R.(2d) 148; 205 A.P.R. 148 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Garieri (G.) (1996), 6 O.T.C. 176 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Dorsey (C.), [2003] O.A.C. Uned. 36; 73 C.C.C.(3d) 443 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Cox, Harold J., Criminal Evidence Handbook 2005-2006 (2006), §§ 8.840 [para. 33]; 8.880 [para. 36].

McWilliams, Peter K., Canadian Criminal Evidence (4th Ed. 2003) (2007 Looseleaf Update), § 29.20.100 [para. 48].

Counsel:

J.G. Corona, for the appellant;

G.A. Lawlor, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 5, 2007, by Scott, C.J.M., Monnin and Freedman, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered on November 8, 2007, when the following opinions were filed:

Scott, C.J.M. (Freedman, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 57;

Monnin, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 58 to 72.