R. v. Graveline (R.), (2006) 347 N.R. 268 (SCC)
Judge | McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Case Date | March 14, 2006 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (2006), 347 N.R. 268 (SCC);2006 SCC 16;[2006] ACS no 16;207 CCC (3d) 481;38 CR (6th) 42;[2006] CarswellQue 3399;266 DLR (4th) 42;EYB 2006-104245;[2006] 1 SCR 609;69 WCB (2d) 721;[2006] SCJ No 16 (QL);347 NR 268;JE 2006-916 |
R. v. Graveline (R.) (2006), 347 N.R. 268 (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: [2006] N.R. TBEd. AP.041
Rita Graveline (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)
(31020; 2006 SCC 16; 2006 CSC 16)
Indexed As: R. v. Graveline (R.)
Supreme Court of Canada
McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ.
April 27, 2006.
Summary:
The accused was charged with the second degree murder of her husband. The only defence raised by the accused was non-mental disorder automatism. The trial judge, on his own initiative, opened for the jury's consideration the possibility of an acquittal based on self-defence. The accused was acquitted. The Crown appealed.
The Quebec Court of Appeal, Rousseau- Houle, J.A., dissenting, set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial. The accused appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada, Lebel, J., dissenting, allowed the appeal and restored the acquittal.
Criminal Law - Topic 4802
Appeals - Indictable offences - General principles - Burden on Crown appellant respecting errors by trial judge - The only defence raised by an accused at a murder trial was non-mental disorder automatism -The trial judge, on his own initiative, opened for the jury's consideration the possibility of an acquittal based on self- defence - The accused was acquitted - The Quebec Court of Appeal allowed a Crown appeal and ordered a new trial - The Supreme Court of Canada restored the acquittal - It had been long established that a Crown appeal could not succeed on an abstract or purely hypothetical possibility that the accused would have been convicted but for the error of law - Something more had to be shown - To obtain a new trial, the Crown had to establish that the trial judge's error(s) might reasonably be thought, in the concrete reality of the case, to have had a material bearing on the acquittal - The Crown was not required to establish that the verdict would necessarily have been different - Generally, alleged errors would go to the defence(s) upon which the accused had relied at trial - For that reason, the errors' impact on the verdict, would not be a mere matter of speculation - However, here the Crown asserted that the jury might have acquitted based on a ground not relied on by the accused (self-defence), there was no reasonable basis for that defence and the trial judge misdirected the jury on the defence - In effect, the Crown sought a finding that the jury acquitted on what the Crown characterized as an unreasonable basis (self-defence) rather than on what it recognized as a reasonable basis (automatism) - The Crown had not discharged its "very heavy" burden - See paragraphs 1 to 20.
Criminal Law - Topic 4951
Appeals - Indictable offences - New trials -Grounds - Misdirection by trial judge - Appeal by Crown from acquittal - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4802 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 4975
Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Appeal from an acquittal - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4802 ].
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Evans (B.J.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 629; 153 N.R. 212; 28 B.C.A.C. 81; 47 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 13].
Cullen v. R., [1949] S.C.R. 658, refd to. [para. 15].
R. v. Morin, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 345; 88 N.R. 161; 30 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [paras. 15, 29].
R. v. Sutton (K.M.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 595; 262 N.R. 384; 230 N.B.R.(2d) 205; 593 A.P.R. 205; 2000 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 16].
R. v. Livermore (C.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 123; 189 N.R. 126; 87 O.A.C. 81; 102 C.C.C.(3d) 212, refd to. [para. 28].
White v. R., [1947] S.C.R. 268, refd to. [para. 29].
R. v. Vézeau, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 277; 8 N.R. 235, refd to. [para. 29].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 676(1)(a) [para. 13].
Counsel:
Isabelle Doray, for the appellant;
Denis Pilon and Martin Côté, for the respondent.
Solicitors of Record:
Soulière Lapointe Doray Michaud Lamoureux, Montreal, Quebec, for the appellant;
Deputy Attorney General of Quebec, Quebec, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on March 14, 2006, before McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered in both official languages on April 27, 2006, and the following opinions were filed:
Fish, J. (McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, Abella and Charron, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 20;
Lebel, J., dissenting - see paragraphs 21 to 31.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Cowan,
...3 S.C.R. 725; considered: R. v. Ekman, 2006 BCCA 206, 209 C.C.C. (3d) 121; R. v. Ekman, 2004 BCSC 900; referred to: R. v. Graveline, 2006 SCC 16, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; R. v. Sparrow (1979), 51 C.C.C. (2d) 443; R. v. Hamilton, 2005 SCC 47, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 432; R. v. Sutton, 2000 SCC 50, [2000......
-
R. v. Nguyen (H.Q.) et al., (2008) 324 Sask.R. 1 (CA)
...or is about to be committed, as a first step in the Mann analysis" - See paragraphs 13 to 14. Cases Noticed: R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Walker (B.G.) (2008), 375 N.R. 228; 310 Sask.R. 305; 423 W.A.C. 305 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 7]. R......
-
R. v. R.J.H., 2006 ABQB 656
...1; 18 C.R.(6th) 203; 237 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 2004 CarswellQue 814; 2004 SCC 27, refd to. [para. 127, footnote 77]. R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268; 207 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 266 D.L.R.(4th) 42; 2006 CarswellQue 3399; 2006 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 129, footnote R. v. Allender (......
-
R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33
...Applying the test set out in R. v. Graveline, 2006 SCC 16, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609 , a new trial on unlawful act manslaughter is warranted. The failure to implement the s. 276 regime carried a significant risk that the jury would, whether consciously or unconsciously, engage in impermissi......
-
R. v. Nguyen (H.Q.) et al., (2008) 324 Sask.R. 1 (CA)
...or is about to be committed, as a first step in the Mann analysis" - See paragraphs 13 to 14. Cases Noticed: R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Walker (B.G.) (2008), 375 N.R. 228; 310 Sask.R. 305; 423 W.A.C. 305 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 7]. R......
-
R. v. R.J.H., 2006 ABQB 656
...1; 18 C.R.(6th) 203; 237 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 2004 CarswellQue 814; 2004 SCC 27, refd to. [para. 127, footnote 77]. R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268; 207 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 266 D.L.R.(4th) 42; 2006 CarswellQue 3399; 2006 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 129, footnote R. v. Allender (......
-
R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33
...Applying the test set out in R. v. Graveline, 2006 SCC 16, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609 , a new trial on unlawful act manslaughter is warranted. The failure to implement the s. 276 regime carried a significant risk that the jury would, whether consciously or unconsciously, engage in impermissi......
-
R. v. Bishop (C.), 2013 NUCA 3
...5, refd to. [para. 119]. R. v. Guarino (J.) et al. (2012), 291 O.A.C. 130; 2012 ONCA 294, refd to. [para. 124]. R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268; 2006 SCC 16, refd to. [para. R. v. W.D.S., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 521; 171 N.R. 360; 157 A.R. 321; 77 W.A.C. 321, refd to. [para.......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (May 19 ' 22, 2020)
...Jeopardy, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(h), R. v. Théroux, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 5, R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33, R. v. Graveline, 2006 SCC 16, R. v. Katigbak, 2011 SCC 48, R. v. McRae, 2013 SCC 68 R. v. R., 2020 ONCA 306 Keywords: Criminal Law, Drug Trafficking, Juries, Alternate J......
-
Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (February 18 22, 2019)
...v The Queen, [1977] 2 SCR 277, R v B. (G.), [1990] 2 SCR 57, R v MacKenzie, [1993] 1 SCR 212, R v Morin, [1988] 2 SCR 345, R v Graveline, 2006 SCC 16 R. v. J.Y., 2019 ONCA 126 Keywords: Criminal Law, Sexual Interference, Sexual Assault, Kienapple principle, Sentencing R. v. R.D., 2019 ONCA ......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (December 23 December 27, 2019)
...Evidence, Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46, ss. 676(1)(a), R. v. J.M.H., 2011 SCC 45, R. v. Rudge, 2011 ONCA 791, R. v. Graveline, 2006 SCC 16, R. v. Curry, 2014 ONCA 174, R. v. Knezevic, 2016 ONCA 914 Ontario Review Board Decisions K (Re), 2019 ONCA 1021 Keywords: Ontario Review Board,......
-
Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (August 19 - 23, 2019)
...s. 279.01(1), s. 286.3(1), s. 286.4, Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), [1998] 1 SCR 27, R. v Hutchinson, 2014 SCC 19, R. v Graveline, 2006 SCC 16 CIVIL DECISIONS McKay v Park, 2019 ONCA 659 [Paciocco, Harvison Young and Zarnett JJ.A.] Facts: The plaintiff brought an action for damages for ......
-
Appeals
...Ltd (1981), 60 CCC (2d) 332 (BCCA). 120 R v Sanver (1973), 12 CCC (2d) 105 (NBSCAD). 121 Section 676(1)(d). 122 See R v Graveline , 2006 SCC 16 at para 13 [ Graveline ]; and R v Morgentaler , [1988] 1 SCR 30. 123 See R v Sutton , 2000 SCC 50 at para 2 [ Sutton ], relying on Vézeau v the Que......
-
Table of cases
...237–39, 240, 242, 243–46, 300, 332 R v Grant, 2016 ONCA 639, 351 OAC 345, 342 CCC (3d) 514 .......................... 461 R v Graveline, [2006] 1 SCR 609, 207 CCC (3d) 481, 2006 SCC 16 ................. 587 R v Gray, (1993) CanLII 3369, 85 Man R (2d) 211, 22 CR (4th) 114 (MB CA) .................
-
Table of cases
...38 R v Grant, [2009] 2 SCR 353, 2009 SCC 32 ........................................40, 41, 42, 45 R v Graveline, [2006] 1 SCR 609, 207 CCC (3d) 481, 2006 SCC 16, rev’g [2005] RJQ 1662, 200 CCC (3d) 247, 2005 QCCA 574 .............. 352, 362 R v Gray (1988), 54 Man R (2d) 240, 44 CCC (3d) 2......
-
Table of Cases
...117–18, 119, 150 R v Grant, 2016 ONCA 639 ........................................................................ 306, 315 R v Graveline, 2006 SCC 16 ...............................................................................321 R v Greco (2001), 159 CCC (3d) 146 (Ont CA) ...................