R. v. Deane (K.), (2001) 265 N.R. 1 (SCC)
Judge | McLachlin, C.J.C., L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Case Date | January 26, 2001 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (2001), 265 N.R. 1 (SCC);[2001] 1 SCR 279;152 CCC (3d) 96;2001 SCC 5;265 NR 1;140 OAC 269 |
R. v. Deane (K.) (2001), 265 N.R. 1 (SCC)
MLB headnote and full text
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
....................
Temp. Cite: [2001] N.R. TBEd. FE.010
Kenneth Deane (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)
(27776)
Indexed As: R. v. Deane (K.)
Supreme Court of Canada
McLachlin, C.J.C., L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel, JJ.
January 26, 2001.
Summary:
The accused police officer was convicted of criminal negligence causing death and received a conditional sentence of two years less a day. He appealed his conviction. The Crown cross-appealed the sentence.
The Ontario Court of Appeal, Weiler, J.A., dissenting, in a decision reported 129 O.A.C. 335, dismissed the appeal and cross-appeal. The accused appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.
Criminal Law - Topic 5045
Appeals - Indictable offences - Dismissal of appeal if no prejudice, substantial wrong or miscarriage results - What constitutes a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice - The accused police officer was convicted of criminal negligence causing death - He appealed his conviction arguing, inter alia, that the trial judge erred in failing to hold a voir dire respecting statements he made to his commander - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court assumed that the voir dire was necessary and the evidence respecting the accused's statements to his commander should not have been admitted because they were made to a person in authority - The court concluded that the trial was fair, or fairer to the accused, than a new trial would be -There was no reasonable possibility that the verdict would have been different had the error not been made - The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the accused's appeal.
Counsel:
Alan D. Gold and Maureen J. McGuire, for the appellant;
Milan Rupic, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard before McLachlin, C.J.C., L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. McLachlin, C.J.C., delivered the following oral decision for the court in both official languages on January 26, 2001.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Notes
...Quarterly 49 (2005): 357–60. Two exceptions to the general acquittal rule include R. v. Deane (2000), 143 CCC (3d) 84 (Ont. CA) affd. [2001] 1 SCR 279; and R. v. Levert , [1994] OJ No. 2627 (CA). 82 For a discussion of the racialized aspects of the case, see Discourses of Domination , 168–9......
-
R. v. Angelillo (G.), (2006) 355 N.R. 226 (SCC)
...161; 198 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 21]. R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 2001 SCC 5, refd to. [para. R. v. Pelletier (1989), 52 C.C.C.(3d) 340 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 23]. R. v. Larche (J.-P.) (2006), 355 N.R. 48; 2006 SCC 5......
-
Schreiber v. Can. (A.G.), (2002) 292 N.R. 250 (SCC)
...intent of Parliament: see R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.) , [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 140 C.C.C.(3d) 449, 2001 SCC 5; R. v. Lamy (E.) (2002), 284 N.R. 311 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 25; and R. v. Mac (M.K.) (2002), 287 N.R. 75; 159 O.A.C. 33 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 24. ......
-
Schreiber v. Can. (A.G.), (2002) 164 O.A.C. 354 (SCC)
...intent of Parliament: see R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.) , [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 140 C.C.C.(3d) 449, 2001 SCC 5; R. v. Lamy (E.) (2002), 284 N.R. 311 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 25; and R. v. Mac (M.K.) (2002), 287 N.R. 75; 159 O.A.C. 33 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 24. ......
-
R. v. Angelillo (G.), (2006) 355 N.R. 226 (SCC)
...161; 198 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 21]. R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 2001 SCC 5, refd to. [para. R. v. Pelletier (1989), 52 C.C.C.(3d) 340 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 23]. R. v. Larche (J.-P.) (2006), 355 N.R. 48; 2006 SCC 5......
-
Schreiber v. Can. (A.G.), (2002) 292 N.R. 250 (SCC)
...intent of Parliament: see R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.) , [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 140 C.C.C.(3d) 449, 2001 SCC 5; R. v. Lamy (E.) (2002), 284 N.R. 311 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 25; and R. v. Mac (M.K.) (2002), 287 N.R. 75; 159 O.A.C. 33 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 24. ......
-
Schreiber v. Can. (A.G.), (2002) 164 O.A.C. 354 (SCC)
...intent of Parliament: see R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.) , [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 140 C.C.C.(3d) 449, 2001 SCC 5; R. v. Lamy (E.) (2002), 284 N.R. 311 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 25; and R. v. Mac (M.K.) (2002), 287 N.R. 75; 159 O.A.C. 33 (S.C.C.), 2002 SCC 24. ......
-
R. v. Colville (D.), 2005 ABCA 319
...(Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 19]. R. v. Deane (K.), [1997] O.J. No. 3578 (C.J. Prov. Div.), affd. (2000), 129 O.A.C. 335 (C.A.), affd. [2001] 1 S.C.R. 279; 265 N.R. 1; 140 O.A.C. 269, refd to. [para. 19]. R. v. Bill (L.D.), [1997] B.C.T.C. Uned. J23; 13 C.R.(5th) 103, additional reasons [19......
-
Notes
...Quarterly 49 (2005): 357–60. Two exceptions to the general acquittal rule include R. v. Deane (2000), 143 CCC (3d) 84 (Ont. CA) affd. [2001] 1 SCR 279; and R. v. Levert , [1994] OJ No. 2627 (CA). 82 For a discussion of the racialized aspects of the case, see Discourses of Domination , 168–9......