R. v. Head (D.), 2012 SKPC 64

• Judge: Morgan, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 18, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2012 SKPC 64;(2012), 396 Sask.R. 98 (PC)

R. v. Head (D.) (2012), 396 Sask.R. 98 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] Sask.R. TBEd. AP.054

Her Majesty the Queen v. Dylan Head

(Information No. 24402152; 2012 SKPC 64)

Indexed As: R. v. Head (D.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Morgan, P.C.J.

April 18, 2012.

Summary:

The accused was charged that he committed mischief by wilfully damaging the dwelling-house of Terrence McKay by firing a shotgun through the window and thereby endangering the life of Terrence McKay, contrary to s. 430(2) of the Criminal Code. Section 430(2) provided "Every one who commits mischief that causes actual danger to life is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life". The effect of the shotgun blast was to smash the outer pane of the two panes of glass. The inner pane was not broken at any point.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found that the act of mischief did not cause "actual danger to life" as required by s. 430(2). The court therefore found the accused not guilty of the charge under s. 430(2), but found him guilty of the lesser included offence of mischief under s. 430(4) as he wilfully destroyed or damaged property.

Criminal Law - Topic 2258

Wilful acts respecting property - Mischief - Causing actual danger to life - The accused was charged that he committed mischief by wilfully damaging the dwelling-house of Terrence McKay by firing a shotgun through the window and thereby endangering the life of Terrence McKay, contrary to s. 430(2) of the Criminal Code - Section 430(2) provided "Every one who commits mischief that causes actual danger to life is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life" - The effect of the shotgun blast was to smash the outer pane of the two panes of glass - The inner pane was not broken at any point - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found that the act of mischief did not cause "actual danger to life" as required by s. 430(2) - While it was argued that the Crown was required to establish an actual danger to life at the time the gun was fired in order to secure a conviction, the court held that it was incumbent upon the Crown to establish that an actual danger to life existed as the direct result of the accused's act of mischief - The danger could not be merely foreseeable, or theoretical, or possible - The court therefore found the accused not guilty of the charge under s. 430(2), but found him guilty of the lesser included offence of mischief under s. 430(4) as he wilfully destroyed or damaged property.

Words and Phrases

Actual danger to life - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court considered the meaning of the phrase "actual danger to life" as used in s. 430(2) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - See paragraphs 16 to 24.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. McKenzie (P.N.) (1996), 141 Sask.R. 221; 114 W.A.C. 221 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Nairn (1955), 112 C.C.C. 272 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16, footnote 1].

R. v. Humphrey (1986), 21 O.A.C. 36 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18, footnote 3].

R. v. Ferguson (T.J.) (2005), 389 A.R. 366; 2005 ABQB 156, refd to. [para. 20, footnote 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 430(2) [para. 2].

Counsel:

T. Healey, for the Crown;

R. Saretzky, for the accused.

This matter was heard at Nipawin, Saskatchewan, before Morgan, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 18, 2012.