R. v. L.V.R., (2014) 361 B.C.A.C. 94 (CA)
| Judge | Newbury, Saunders and Harris, JJ.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
| Case Date | March 27, 2014 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | (2014), 361 B.C.A.C. 94 (CA);2014 BCCA 349 |
R. v. L.V.R. (2014), 361 B.C.A.C. 94 (CA);
619 W.A.C. 94
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2014] B.C.A.C. TBEd. SE.017
Regina (respondent) v. L.V.R. (appellant)
(CA039981; 2014 BCCA 349)
Indexed As: R. v. L.V.R.
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Newbury, Saunders and Harris, JJ.A.
September 12, 2014.
Summary:
The applicant was convicted by a judge sitting alone in the Supreme Court of British Columbia of two counts of touching M.H., a person under 14, for a sexual purpose; one count of touching D.O., a person under 16, for a sexual purpose; uttering a threat to M.H.'s mother; and making child pornography. He appealed and sought an order for the appointment of counsel to assist him with his appeal under s. 684 of the Criminal Code.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Hinkson, J.A., allowed the application for the appointment of counsel. See 336 B.C.A.C. 220; 574 W.A.C. 220.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
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.
Civil Rights - Topic 1604
Property - Search warrants - Validity of - See paragraphs 1 to 29.
Courts - Topic 691
Judges - Disqualification - Bias - Reasonable apprehension of bias - See paragraphs 64 to 85.
Criminal Law - Topic 703
Sexual offences, public morals and disorderly conduct - Sexual offences - Particular offences - Sexual exploitation of a young person - See paragraphs 48 to 62.
Criminal Law - Topic 3054
Special powers - Search warrants - Execution of - See paragraphs 1 to 29.
Criminal Law - Topic 3183
Special powers - Setting aside search warrants - Grounds - Information - Sufficiency of form and content - See paragraphs 30 to 35.
Criminal Law - Topic 4300
Procedure - Trial judge - Duties and functions of - Respecting credibility of witnesses (incl. accused) - See paragraphs 37 to 47.
Criminal Law - Topic 4351
Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Direction regarding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - See paragraphs 75 to 79.
Criminal Law - Topic 4377
Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding credibility of witnesses - See paragraphs 37 to 47 and 80 to 84.
Criminal Law - Topic 4866
Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Misapprehension of evidence - See paragraph 46.
Criminal Law - Topic 5434
Evidence - Witnesses - Cross-examination of accused - Improper questions - What constitute - See paragraphs 75 to 79.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351, refd to. [para. 1].
R. v. Sutherland (M.) (2000), 139 O.A.C. 53; 52 O.R.(3d) 27; 150 C.C.C.(3d) 231 (C.A.), dist. [para. 14].
Gooding v. United States (1974), 416 U.S. 430, refd to. [para. 20].
R. v. Vu (T.L.) (2011), 315 B.C.A.C. 36; 535 W.A.C. 36; 285 C.C.C.(3d) 160; 2011 BCCA 536, affd. [2013] 3 S.C.R. 657; 451 N.R. 199; 345 B.C.A.C. 155; 589 W.A.C. 155; 2013 SCC 60, refd to. [para. 33].
Descôteaux et al. v. Mierzwinski et al., [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860; 44 N.R. 462; 70 C.C.C.(2d) 385, refd to. [para. 33].
CanadianOxy Chemicals Ltd. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1999] 1 S.C.R. 743; 237 N.R. 373; 122 B.C.A.C. 1; 200 W.A.C. 1; 133 C.C.C.(3d) 426, refd to. [para. 33].
Wiens v. R., [1973] 6 W.W.R. 757 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 33].
R. v. Bacon (J.D.) et al. (2010), 285 B.C.A.C. 108; 482 W.A.C. 108; 2010 BCCA 135, refd to. [para. 34].
R. v. Cloutier (B.A.) (2011), 278 O.A.C. 331; 272 C.C.C.(3d) 291; 2011 ONCA 484, refd to. [para. 43].
R. v. Audet (Y.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 171; 197 N.R. 172; 175 N.B.R.(2d) 81; 446 A.P.R. 81; 135 D.L.R.(4th) 20, refd to. [para. 49].
R. v. Edwards (O.E.) (2003), 177 B.C.A.C. 24; 291 W.A.C. 24; 172 C.C.C.(3d) 313; 2003 BCCA 47, refd to. [para. 50].
R. v. R.H.J. (1993), 37 B.C.A.C. 272; 60 W.A.C. 272; 86 C.C.C.(3d) 354; 27 C.R.(4th) 40 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].
R. v. Aird (A.) (2013), 307 O.A.C. 183; 2013 ONCA 447, refd to. [para. 54].
R. v. Alsadi (M.F.) (2012), 320 B.C.A.C. 149; 543 W.A.C. 149; 285 C.C.C.(3d) 316; 2012 BCCA 183, refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Kiared (L.), [2008] A.R. Uned. 744; [2009] A.W.L.D. 749; 2008 ABQB 767, refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Pappajohn, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 120; 32 N.R. 104; 111 D.L.R.(3d) 1; 14 C.R.(3d) 243, refd to. [para. 56].
R. v. Manuel (N.V.) (2008), 254 B.C.A.C. 69; 426 W.A.C. 69; 293 D.L.R.(4th) 713; 2008 BCCA 143, refd to. [para. 56].
R. v. Esau (A.J.), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 777; 214 N.R. 241; 148 D.L.R.(4th) 662, refd to. [para. 56].
R. v. Hossu (E.) (2002), 162 O.A.C. 143; 167 C.C.C.(3d) 344 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].
R. v. Lyttle (M.) (2005), 203 O.A.C. 41; 2030 A.C. 41; 202 C.C.C.(3d) 549, refd to. [para. 68].
R. v. R.D.S., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484; 218 N.R. 1; 161 N.S.R.(2d) 241; 477 A.P.R. 241; 118 C.C.C.(3d) 353, refd to. [para. 69].
Committee for Justice and Liberty Foundation et al. v. National Energy Board et al., [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369; 9 N.R. 115; 68 D.L.R.(3d) 716, refd to. [para. 69].
R. v. D.O.L., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 419; 161 N.R. 1; 88 Man.R.(2d) 241; 51 W.A.C. 241; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 71].
R. v. K.M.E. (2003), 178 B.C.A.C. 199; 292 W.A.C. 199; 172 C.C.C.(3d) 28; 2003 BCCA 68, refd to. [para. 76].
R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 397; 3 C.R.(4th) 302, refd to. [para. 77].
R. v. C.W.H. (1991), 3 B.C.A.C. 205; 7 W.A.C. 205; 68 C.C.C.(3d) 146 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77].
R. v. Hehn (G.) (2008), 254 B.C.A.C. 215; 426 W.A.C. 215; 2008 BCCA 170, refd to. [para. 78].
R. v. R.E.M., [2008] 3 S.C.R. 3; 380 N.R. 47; 260 B.C.A.C. 40; 439 W.A.C. 40; 2008 SCC 51, refd to. [para. 84].
Counsel:
P. McGowan and K. McCleery, for the appellant;
M. Street, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on March 27, 2014, by Newbury, Saunders and Harris, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Saunders, J.A., delivered the following decision for the court on September 12, 2014.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v DEZ, 2018 ABCA 99
...in cases where there is one person’s word against another. The argument is sometimes successful, sometimes not: see eg R v R (LV), 2014 BCCA 349, 316 CCC (3d) 120, leave denied [2014] SCCA No 485 (QL); R v W(J), 2014 ONCA 628; R v W(JS), 2013 ONCA 593, 301 CCC (3d) 252; R v Corbett, 2013 ON......
-
R. v. Athwal, 2017 ONSC 96
...is actually a successive warrant applicant. Less common, is a “re-swearing” of an original ITO with added modification: see R. v. L.V.R., 2014 BCCA 349, at paras. 16-19 (leave to appeal refused [2016] S.C.C.A. No. In some instances, an affiant’s grounds of belief in an ITO are exclusively, ......
-
R. v. P.D.W., 2015 BCSC 660
...of authorities including: R. v. Worthington , 2012 BCCA 454; R. v. Allen , 2012 BCCA 377; R. v. Woodward , 2011 ONCA 610; R. v. L.V.R. , 2014 BCCA 349; R. v. R.B. , 2014 ONCA 489; R. v. Bauer , 2013 ONCA 691; R. v. Manjra, 2009 ONCA 485; R. v. Bissonnette , 2014 ONSC 5767; R. v. R.J.H ., 20......
-
R. v. M.E-H., (2015) 368 B.C.A.C. 89 (CA)
...a colloquy rather than the reasons for judgment to determine whether the judge used the evidence for an improper purpose: R. v. L.V.R. , 2014 BCCA 349 at paras. 77-79. [55] I would not accede to this ground of appeal. 3. Did the trial judge err in applying the specific intent requirement un......
-
R v DEZ, 2018 ABCA 99
...in cases where there is one person’s word against another. The argument is sometimes successful, sometimes not: see eg R v R (LV), 2014 BCCA 349, 316 CCC (3d) 120, leave denied [2014] SCCA No 485 (QL); R v W(J), 2014 ONCA 628; R v W(JS), 2013 ONCA 593, 301 CCC (3d) 252; R v Corbett, 2013 ON......
-
R. v. Athwal, 2017 ONSC 96
...is actually a successive warrant applicant. Less common, is a “re-swearing” of an original ITO with added modification: see R. v. L.V.R., 2014 BCCA 349, at paras. 16-19 (leave to appeal refused [2016] S.C.C.A. No. In some instances, an affiant’s grounds of belief in an ITO are exclusively, ......
-
R. v. P.D.W., 2015 BCSC 660
...of authorities including: R. v. Worthington , 2012 BCCA 454; R. v. Allen , 2012 BCCA 377; R. v. Woodward , 2011 ONCA 610; R. v. L.V.R. , 2014 BCCA 349; R. v. R.B. , 2014 ONCA 489; R. v. Bauer , 2013 ONCA 691; R. v. Manjra, 2009 ONCA 485; R. v. Bissonnette , 2014 ONSC 5767; R. v. R.J.H ., 20......
-
R. v. M.E-H., (2015) 368 B.C.A.C. 89 (CA)
...a colloquy rather than the reasons for judgment to determine whether the judge used the evidence for an improper purpose: R. v. L.V.R. , 2014 BCCA 349 at paras. 77-79. [55] I would not accede to this ground of appeal. 3. Did the trial judge err in applying the specific intent requirement un......