R. v. Lawrence (R.C.P.)

• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Judge: Newbury, D. Smith and Groberman, JJ.A.
• Citation: (2015), 375 B.C.A.C. 270 (CA),2015 BCCA 358
• Date: 12 August 2015

R. v. Lawrence (R.C.P.) (2015), 375 B.C.A.C. 270 (CA);

    644 W.A.C. 270

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] B.C.A.C. TBEd. AU.017

Regina (respondent) v. Robert Charles Phillip Lawrence (appellant)

(CA39802; 2015 BCCA 358)

Indexed As: R. v. Lawrence (R.C.P.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Newbury, D. Smith and Groberman, JJ.A.

August 12, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of sexual assault and attempting to render the victim incapable of resistance to sexual assault by choking her with his hands. The accused appealed his convictions on the grounds that the trial judge erred in: (1) admitting opinion evidence from a police officer who was not qualified to give such evidence; (2) relying on inadmissible and irrelevant good character evidence respecting the victim's good relationship with her husband and children and inadmissible and irrelevant bad character evidence respecting the accused's temper, drug use, self-centeredness, lack of respect for the law, sexual interests and post-offence flight from the police; (3) improperly allowing cross-examination of the accused; (4) providing inadequate reasons for judgment; and (5) permitting the Crown to abusively cross-examine the accused.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The trial judge made no error in fact or law. To the extent that the Crown's cross-examination of the accused was abusive and improper, any such error was harmless where the trial judge did not rely on the bad character evidence for propensity reasoning.

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.

Criminal Law - Topic 4684

Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Reasons for judgment - Sufficiency of - See paragraphs 65 to 68.

Criminal Law - Topic 4957

Appeals - Indictable offences - New trials - Grounds - Misapprehension of evidence - See paragraphs 63 to 64.

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 - See paragraphs 27 to 39, 69 to 77.

Criminal Law - Topic 5434

Evidence and witnesses - Cross-examination of accused - Improper questions - What constitute - See paragraphs 58 to 62.

Criminal Law - Topic 5449

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence respecting the accused - Character of accused (incl. discreditable conduct) - General - See paragraphs 47 to 57.

Criminal Law - Topic 5528

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence respecting the victim - Character of victim - See paragraphs 42 to 46.

Evidence - Topic 7000.3

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Opinion evidence - What constitutes - See paragraphs 27 to 37.

Evidence - Topic 7001

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Qualifications and declaration that a witness is an expert - See paragraphs 27 to 37.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. B.S.B., [2008] B.C.T.C. Uned. 561; 2008 BCSC 561, affd. (2009), 280 B.C.A.C. 13; 474 W.A.C. 13; 2009 BCCA 520, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Wise (M.) (2002), 163 B.C.A.C. 136; 267 W.A.C. 136; 2002 BCCA 80, affd. (2003), 299 N.R. 372; 177 B.C.A.C. 133; 291 W.A.C. 133; 2003 SCC 1, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Kwiatkowski (P.) (2010), 285 B.C.A.C. 43; 482 W.A.C. 43; 2010 BCCA 124, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Vickers, [1991] B.C.J. No. 687 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Campbell, [1998] O.J. No. 2332 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Abbey, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 24; 43 N.R. 30, refd to. [para. 29].

Abbott and Haliburton Co. Ltd. et al. v. WBLI Chartered Accountants (2015), 470 N.R. 324; 360 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 1135 A.P.R. 1; 2015 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 9; 166 N.R. 245; 71 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. J.A., [2011] 1 S.C.R. 628; 413 N.R. 1; 275 O.A.C. 6; 2011 SCC 17, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Marquard (D.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 81; 66 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Korol (L.R.) (2009), 268 B.C.A.C. 136; 452 W.A.C. 136; 2009 BCCA 118, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Foley (J.A.) (1996), 75 B.C.A.C. 195; 123 W.A.C. 195 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Rayner (D.V.) (2000), 189 N.S.R.(2d) 144; 590 A.P.R. 144; 2000 NSCA 143, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Rodrigue (K.) (2007), 245 B.C.A.C. 19; 405 W.A.C. 19; 2007 YKCA 9, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Sims (1994), 87 C.C.C.(3d) 402 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Seaboyer and Gayme, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577; 128 N.R. 81; 48 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Darrach (A.S.) (2000), 259 N.R. 336; 137 O.A.C. 91; 2000 SCC 46, refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. S.G.G., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 716; 214 N.R. 161; 94 B.C.A.C. 81; 152 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Lowe (D.A.) (2009), 274 B.C.A.C. 92; 463 W.A.C. 92; 2009 BCCA 338, refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Dunn (1993), 82 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Simpson (A.) et al. (2015), 473 N.R. 94; 2015 SCC 40, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. M.F. (2009), 253 O.A.C. 12; 2009 ONCA 617, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Moose (N.C.) (2004), 190 Man.R.(2d) 156; 335 W.A.C. 156; 190 C.C.C.(3d) 521; 2004 MBCA 176, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. G.M. (2011), 282 O.A.C. 1; 2011 ONCA 503, refd to. [para. 60].

R. v. F.E.E. (2011), 286 O.A.C. 109; 2011 ONCA 783, refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Lohrer (A.W.) (2004), 329 N.R. 1; 208 B.C.A.C. 1; 344 W.A.C. 1; 2004 SCC 80, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. R.E.M. (2008), 380 N.R. 47; 260 B.C.A.C. 40; 439 W.A.C. 40; 2008 SCC 51, refd to. [para. 66].

R. v. Vuradin (F.) (2013), 446 N.R. 53; 553 A.R. 1; 583 W.A.C. 1; 2013 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Aalders, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 482; 154 N.R. 161; 55 Q.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. Fanjoy, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 233; 62 N.R. 253; 11 O.A.C. 381, refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. Henry (D.B.) et al. (2005), 342 N.R. 259; 376 A.R. 1; 360 W.A.C. 1; 219 B.C.A.C. 1; 361 W.A.C. 1; 2005 SCC 76, refd to. [para. 70].

R. v. Lyttle (M.G.) (2014), 316 N.R. 52; 184 O.A.C. 1; 2004 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 70].

R. v. R. (1994), 74 O.A.C. 363; 94 C.C.C.(3d) 168 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Dalen (R.) (2008), 264 B.C.A.C. 54; 445 W.A.C. 54; 2008 BCCA 530, refd to. [para. 72].

R. v. Khan (A.R.) (1998), 109 B.C.A.C. 299; 177 W.A.C. 299; 126 C.C.C.(3d) 523 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 72].

Authors and Works Noticed:

McWilliams, Peter K., Canadian Criminal Evidence (4th Ed.) (2013 looseleaf), § 21:10.20 [para. 51].

Counsel:

P. McGowan and K. McCleery, for the appellant;

M. Levitz and M. Street, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on March 24, 2015, at Vancouver, B.C., before Newbury, D. Smith and Groberman, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

On August 12, 2015, D. Smith, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.