R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73
| Judge | The Honourable Mr. Justice Peter Costigan,The Honourable Mr. Justice Thomas W. Wakeling,The Honourable Madam Justice Dawn Pentelechuk |
| Docket Number | 1803-0069-A |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
| Date | 21 February 2020 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
7 practice notes
-
R v Khan, 2020 ABCA 466
...[35] Trial Transcript 480:8. [36] Trial Transcript 483:30 & 484:9-25. [37] R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. [38] The Queen v. J.O.L., 2020 ABCA 73, ¶ 15. See The Queen v. Jaw, 2009 SCC 42, ¶ 32; [2009] 3 S.C.R. 26, 44 (“An appellate court must examine the alleged error in the context of the entire......
-
R v Way,
...applies. The entire charge is reviewed and the standard is not one of perfection, but that of a properly instructed jury: R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73 at paras [12] Lastly, trial fairness issues also raise a question of law, and a perceived apprehension of......
-
R v Nauya,
...jury or failed to provide an essential direction to the jury is a question of law, subject to the correctness standard of review: R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73 at para [11] We begin our analysis with the second ground of appeal – that the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the mens rea for ......
-
R v Thompson,
...wife, threatening “I will ruin your life:” ibid. The Court of Appeal wrote as follows at para 52 of R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73: [52] We agree the trial judge erred in refusing defence counsel’s request to provide a specific instruction regarding......
Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
-
R v Khan, 2020 ABCA 466
...[35] Trial Transcript 480:8. [36] Trial Transcript 483:30 & 484:9-25. [37] R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. [38] The Queen v. J.O.L., 2020 ABCA 73, ¶ 15. See The Queen v. Jaw, 2009 SCC 42, ¶ 32; [2009] 3 S.C.R. 26, 44 (“An appellate court must examine the alleged error in the context of the entire......
-
R v Way,
...applies. The entire charge is reviewed and the standard is not one of perfection, but that of a properly instructed jury: R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73 at paras [12] Lastly, trial fairness issues also raise a question of law, and a perceived apprehension of......
-
R v Nauya,
...jury or failed to provide an essential direction to the jury is a question of law, subject to the correctness standard of review: R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73 at para [11] We begin our analysis with the second ground of appeal – that the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the mens rea for ......
-
R v Thompson,
...wife, threatening “I will ruin your life:” ibid. The Court of Appeal wrote as follows at para 52 of R v JOL, 2020 ABCA 73: [52] We agree the trial judge erred in refusing defence counsel’s request to provide a specific instruction regarding......
Request a trial to view additional results