R v Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106
| Jurisdiction | Saskatchewan |
| Judge | The Honourable Mr. Justice Ottenbreit,The Honourable Madam Justice Jackson,The Honourable Madam Justice Ryan-Froslie |
| Citation | 2017 SKCA 106 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan) |
| Docket Number | CACR2720 |
| Date | 07 December 2017 |
-
- 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
3 practice notes
-
R v Nicholson, 2018 SKCA 62
...standard of review concerning errors alleged in a jury charge requires an appellate court to take a functional approach (R v Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106, 357 CCC (3d) 263). It is the overall effect of the charge that matters. Jury instructions must be viewed as a whole and the jury charge in ......
-
R v Lightning, 2018 ABCA 324
...with innocence, others consistent with guilt.” See also R v Foerster, 2017 BCCA 105 at paras 53-60, 346 CCC (3d) 163; R v Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106 at para 43, 357 CCC (3d) [38] Further, while the trial judge expressly warned that the jury must be careful about inferring guilt based on evid......
-
R. v. Moar,
...after-the-fact conduct is more consistent with one offence than the other. [124] In addition, the defence pointed to R. v. Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106, at para. 43 as authority for the proposition that after-the-fact conduct has no probative value on the issue of intent for murder, because it......
3 cases
-
R v Nicholson, 2018 SKCA 62
...standard of review concerning errors alleged in a jury charge requires an appellate court to take a functional approach (R v Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106, 357 CCC (3d) 263). It is the overall effect of the charge that matters. Jury instructions must be viewed as a whole and the jury charge in ......
-
R v Lightning, 2018 ABCA 324
...with innocence, others consistent with guilt.” See also R v Foerster, 2017 BCCA 105 at paras 53-60, 346 CCC (3d) 163; R v Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106 at para 43, 357 CCC (3d) [38] Further, while the trial judge expressly warned that the jury must be careful about inferring guilt based on evid......
-
R. v. Moar,
...after-the-fact conduct is more consistent with one offence than the other. [124] In addition, the defence pointed to R. v. Lumberjack, 2017 SKCA 106, at para. 43 as authority for the proposition that after-the-fact conduct has no probative value on the issue of intent for murder, because it......