R. v. Madraga (G.A.), 2001 SKCA 10

• Judge: Vancise, Gerwing and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: January 15, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2001 SKCA 10;(2001), 203 Sask.R. 78 (CA)

R. v. Madraga (G.A.) (2001), 203 Sask.R. 78 (CA);

    240 W.A.C. 78

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] Sask.R. TBEd. FE.062

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. George Alexander Madraga (respondent)

(No. 119; 2001 SKCA 10)

Indexed As: R. v. Madraga (G.A.)

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Vancise, Gerwing and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.

January 15, 2001.

Summary:

The accused appealed his conviction for having care and control of a motor vehicle while having an excessive blood-alcohol level.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 198 Sask.R. 139, allowed the appeal, set aside the con­viction and ordered a new trial. The Crown appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the ac­cused's conviction.

Courts - Topic 583

Judges - Duties - Re reasons for decisions - The accused was charged with having care and control of a motor vehicle while having an excessive blood-alcohol level - At trial the accused called five witnesses, including two expert witnesses - The trial judge convicted the accused, stating that "the accused's evidence is not credible" and there was no reasonable doubt - The summary conviction appeal court allowed the accused's appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that the trial judge's reasons did not deal with the issues raised by the defence witnesses - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal - It was obvious that the trial judge, having found the accused's evidence not to be credible, also found that none of the defence evidence was evidence to the contrary pursuant to s. 258(1) of the Criminal Code - The court restored the accused's conviction.

Criminal Law - Topic 4300

Procedure - Trial judge - Duties and func­tions of - Respecting credibility of witnesses (incl. accused) - [See Courts - Topic 583 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4304.2

Procedure - Trial judge - Duties and func­tions of - Duty to consider totality of evidence - [See Courts - Topic 583 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4684

Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Reasons for judgment - Suffi­ciency of - [See Courts - Topic 583 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4957.1

Appeals - Indictable offences - New trials -Grounds - Failure to consider evidence - [See Courts - Topic 583 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Barrett (D.), [1995] 1 S.C.R. 752; 179 N.R. 68; 80 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Gibson (1992), 100 Sask.R. 88; 18 W.A.C. 88 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Counsel:

W. Dean Sinclair, for the Crown;

Martel D. Popescul, Q.C., for the accused.

This appeal was heard by Vancise, Ger­wing and Sher­stobitoff, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal on January 15, 2001. The follow­ing oral decision was delivered by Sherstobitoff, J.A., on January 15, 2001 and released in writing on January 25, 2001.