R. v. MacDonald (J.J.), (1989) 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218 (CA)
Judge | Macdonald, Pace and Chipman, JJ.A. |
Court | Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
Case Date | April 14, 1989 |
Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
Citations | (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218 (CA) |
R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218 (CA);
230 A.P.R. 218
MLB headnote and full text
John Joseph MacDonald (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)
(S.C.C. No. 01944)
Indexed As: R. v. MacDonald (J.J.)
Nova Scotia Supreme Court
Appeal Division
Macdonald, Pace and Chipman, JJ.A.
April 14, 1989.
Summary:
The accused was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault contrary to s. 246.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. The accused appealed.
The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Appeal Division, dismissed the appeal.
Criminal Law - Topic 207
Common law defences - Alibi - An accused charged with sexual assault raised an alibi - The trial judge instructed the jury that if they disbelieved the alibi and were satisfied that it was given to deceive police they could use that in support of the complainant's evidence - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not misdirect the jury - If the jury was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the alibi was a fabrication to deceive, the jury could infer that the false alibi supported the complainant's identification of the accused - See paragraphs 64 to 78.
Criminal Law - Topic 4358
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding circumstantial evidence - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal stated that a jury should be instructed that before an accused could be convicted on circumstantial evidence the jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that his guilt was the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the proven facts - See paragraphs 29 to 33.
Criminal Law - Topic 4372
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding alibi - An accused charged with sexual assault raised an alibi - The accused submitted that the trial judge failed to direct the jury that if they disbelieved the alibi they still had to determine on all the evidence whether the Crown proved the offence beyond a reasonable doubt - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the whole of the trial judge's jury charge clearly left the jury with the impression that the Crown bore the ultimate burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that they had to consider all the evidence in reaching a verdict and that the accused did not have to prove his alibi - See paragraphs 38 to 63.
Criminal Law - Topic 4377
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding credibility of witnesses - A trial judge directed a jury that certain discrepancies in the testimony of a witness, such as time and distances, did not necessarily mean that the testimony should be discredited, and that discrepancies in trivial matters were usually unimportant - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not err in so directing the jury - See paragraphs 17 to 25.
Criminal Law - Topic 5045
Appeals - Indictable offences - Dismissal of appeal if error resulted in no miscarriage of justice - Miscarriage of justice - What constitutes - The accused was charged with sexual assault - The complainant testified that the accused demanded fellatio - The complainant was not cross-examined on the nature of the sexual act - One of the complainant's statements to police described the sexual act in words meaning masturbation - The accused wished to cross-examine the police officer on this aspect of the statement - The trial judge disallowed such cross-examination - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the trial judge had a discretion to allow such cross-examination, but could also refuse it - The court stated that the trial judge did not err in disallowing cross-examination and, if he did, the appeal would be dismissed under s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code on the ground that there was no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice - See paragraphs 79 to 87.
Criminal Law - Topic 5415
Evidence - Witnesses - Cross-examination of - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5045 above].
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Cooper (1977), 14 N.R. 181; 34 C.C.C.(2d) 18 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 30].
Hodge's Case (1838), 2 Lewis 227; 168 E.R. 1136, refd to. [para. 30].
R. v. Chase, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 293; 80 N.R. 247; 82 N.B.R.(2d) 229; 208 A.P.R. 229; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 36].
R. v. Davison, DeRosie and MacArthur (1974), 20 C.C.C.(2d) 424 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 66].
R. v. Tzimopoulos (1987), 17 O.A.C. 1; 54 C.R.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 69].
R. v. Turnbull et al., [1977] 1 Q.B. 224, refd to. [para. 75].
R. v. Mahoney (1979), 50 C.C.C.(2d) 380 (Ont. C.A.), affd. on other grounds, 41 N.R. 582; 67 C.C.C.(2d) 197 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 76].
R. v. Jackson and Woods (1974), 20 C.C.C.(2d) 113, refd to. [para. 84].
R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759; 30 N.R. 181; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 193, refd to. [para. 86].
R. v. Yebes, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 168; 78 N.R. 351; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 417; 59 C.R. (3d) 108, refd to. [para. 88].
Statutes Noticed:
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 7, sect. 11(d).
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 246.1(1)(a).
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 686(1)(b)(iii).
Authors and Works Noticed:
Cross on Evidence (4th Ed.), p. 227 [para. 81].
May, Richard, Criminal Evidence (1986), p. 285 [para. 74].
McWilliams, P.K., Canadian Criminal Evidence (2nd Ed.), p. 1049 [para. 83].
Phipson on Evidence (13th Ed.), p. 806 [para. 82].
Counsel:
William B. Smith, for the appellant;
Dana W. Giovannetti, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on February 16, 1989, before Macdonald, Pace and Chipman, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Appeal Division.
On April 14, 1989, Macdonald, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Styles (G.R.), (2000) 189 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 116 (NFTD)
...refd to. [para. 47]. R. v. Stoddart (1987), 20 O.A.C. 321; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164; 74 C.C.C.(3d) 1......
-
R. v. Letourneau (D.) and Tremblay (J.L.), (1994) 53 B.C.A.C. 81 (CA)
...(P.C.), refd to. [para. 73]. R. v. Jones, [1971] 2 O.R. 549; 3 C.C.C.(2d) 153 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230; 7 W.C.B.(2d) 152 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74]. R. v. Erven, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 926; 25 N.R. 49; 30 N.S.......
-
R. v. Savoy (R.L.), [2000] B.C.T.C. 247 (S.C.): Voice Identification (Comment), [2000] B.C.T.C. 247 (S.C.)
...17]. R. v. Neary (G.A.) (2000), 187 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 142; 566 A.P.R. 142 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Parsons, [1999] Y.J. No. 3 (Terr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 19]. R. v. Baxt......
-
R. v. Pargelen (G.), (1996) 95 O.A.C. 200 (CA)
...refd to. [para. 56]. R. v. Grant (1989), 58 Man.R.(2d) 281; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 410 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Demerchant (1991), 116 N.B.R.(2d) 247; 293 A.P.R. 247; 66 C.C.C.(3d) 4......
-
R. v. Styles (G.R.), (2000) 189 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 116 (NFTD)
...refd to. [para. 47]. R. v. Stoddart (1987), 20 O.A.C. 321; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164; 74 C.C.C.(3d) 1......
-
R. v. Letourneau (D.) and Tremblay (J.L.), (1994) 53 B.C.A.C. 81 (CA)
...(P.C.), refd to. [para. 73]. R. v. Jones, [1971] 2 O.R. 549; 3 C.C.C.(2d) 153 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230; 7 W.C.B.(2d) 152 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74]. R. v. Erven, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 926; 25 N.R. 49; 30 N.S.......
-
R. v. Savoy (R.L.), [2000] B.C.T.C. 247 (S.C.): Voice Identification (Comment), [2000] B.C.T.C. 247 (S.C.)
...17]. R. v. Neary (G.A.) (2000), 187 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 142; 566 A.P.R. 142 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Parsons, [1999] Y.J. No. 3 (Terr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 19]. R. v. Baxt......
-
R. v. Pargelen (G.), (1996) 95 O.A.C. 200 (CA)
...refd to. [para. 56]. R. v. Grant (1989), 58 Man.R.(2d) 281; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 410 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57]. R. v. MacDonald (J.J.) (1989), 90 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 230 A.P.R. 218; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Demerchant (1991), 116 N.B.R.(2d) 247; 293 A.P.R. 247; 66 C.C.C.(3d) 4......