R. v. Morin (C.L.), (2009) 470 A.R. 284 (QB)

• Judge: Watson, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: Thursday February 26, 2009
• Citations: (2009), 470 A.R. 284 (QB);2009 ABQB 486

R. v. Morin (C.L.) (2009), 470 A.R. 284 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] A.R. TBEd. AU.102

Her Majesty The Queen v. Clifford Leo Morin (020846416Q1; 2009 ABQB 486)

Indexed As: R. v. Morin (C.L.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Watson, J.

August 5, 2009.

Summary:

The accused was charged with assault, assault with a weapon, unlawful confinement and uttering threats. The complainant was his elderly mother, whom the accused lived with and cared for because his mother had special needs. The Crown sought to introduce a number of out of court statements made by the now deceased mother to police and others.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment reported (2005), 383 A.R. 1, ruled that two of the statements, an audiotaped interview by police and an affidavit sworn by the mother for the purpose of obtaining an Emergency Protection Order, were admissible for their truth under the principled approach to the admission of hearsay. All other statements were admissible for the limited purposes of "narrative" and "capacity".

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench found the accused guilty of unlawful confinement and uttering a death threat, but acquitted him of assault and assault with a weapon.

Criminal Law - Topic 1427

Assaults - Evidence and proof - The accused, elderly himself, lived with and cared for his elderly special needs mother from 1999 to 2002 - The accused admittedly lost control of himself on occasion due to frustration, impatience, stress and his increasing inability to look after his mother because of his own health problems - The accused and his sister had an acrimonious relationship - After discovering her mother with black eyes, the sister complained to authorities and the accused was charged with assault, assault with a weapon, unlawful confinement and uttering a death threat - The Crown alleged "elder abuse", but did not argue that the accused wished harm on his mother or bore her any animus - Its theory was that the accused, during those tantrums, acted with excessive force - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused caused his mother's black eyes by assaulting her - Although satisfied that the accused, out of frustration and anger, was verbally abusive and sometimes handled his mother too roughly and recklessly, that was not what he was charged with - The court found the accused guilty of unlawful confinement when he put mittens on his mother's hands, then tied her to her bed or chair for extended periods, allegedly solely to keep her from harming herself by excessively scratching - The accused intentionally bound his mother out of anger and to control her conduct, without any lawful justification, excuse or defence - The accused was also convicted of uttering a death threat for threatening to throw his mother off the balcony - He did this in a fit of anger to intimidate her - It was clear to her that he was not joking and she was fearful and intimidated.

Criminal Law - Topic 1450.1

Unlawful confinement, imprisonment or forcible seizure - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1427].

Criminal Law - Topic 1565

Threats - Intention or mens rea - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1427].

Cases Noticed:

N.R. v. B.B. et al., [2009] 5 W.W.R. 191; 385 N.R. 85; 266 B.C.A.C. 1; 449 W.A.C. 1; 303 D.L.R.(4th) 193; 62 R.F.L.(6th) 239; J.E. 2009-352; 2009 SCC 10, refd to. [para. 1, footnote 1].

R. v. Layton (C.A.) (2009), 390 N.R. 340; 245 Man.R.(2d) 26; 466 W.A.C. 26; 2009 SCC 36, refd to. [para. 2, footnote 2].

R. v. Dewey (M.R.) (1998), 232 A.R. 143; 195 W.A.C. 143; 132 C.C.C.(3d) 348; 21 C.R.(5th) 232; 1998 CarswellAlta 1220; 1999 ABCA 5, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 3].

R. v. Sinclair (G.W.), [2008] 7 W.W.R. 286; 225 Man.R.(2d) 167; 419 W.A.C. 167; 229 C.C.C.(3d) 485; 56 C.R.(6th) 29; 2008 CarswellMan 55; 77 W.C.B.(2d) 66; 2008 MBCA 15, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 4].

R. v. MacKay (J.D.) [2005] 3 S.C.R. 725; 343 N.R. 218; 293 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 762 A.P.R. 1; 203 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 261 D.L.R.(4th) 513; 2005 CarswellNB 713; 2005 SCC 79, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 5].

R. v. Paice (C.J.D.), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 339; 332 N.R. 159; 262 Sask.R. 171; 341 W.A.C. 171; 195 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 29 C.R.(6th) 1; 251 D.L.R.(4th) 193; [2006] 3 W.W.R. 38; 2005 CarswellSask 242; 2005 SCC 22, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 6].

R. v. S.J.B., [2002] 10 W.W.R. 255; 312 A.R. 313; 281 W.A.C. 313; 166 C.C.C.(3d) 537; 5 C.R.(6th) 345; 5 Alta. L.R.(4th) 207; 54 W.C.B.(2d) 410; 2002 ABCA 143, refd to. [para. 12, footnote 7].

R. v. Clemente (V.F.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 758; 168 N.R. 310; 95 Man.R.(2d) 161; 70 W.A.C. 161; 1994 CanLII 49; 91 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 31 C.R.(4th) 28; [1994] 8 W.W.R. 1; 1994 CarswellMan 152, refd to. [para. 13, footnote 8].

Stephens v. Myers (1830), 4 Car. & P. 349; 172 E.R. 735, refd to. [para. 13, footnote 9].

Tuberville v. Savage (1669), 1 Mod. Rep. 3; 86 E.R. 684 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 16, footnote 10].

R. v. Jobidon, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 714; 128 N.R. 321; 49 O.A.C. 83; 7 C.R.(4th) 233; 66 C.C.C.(3d) 454; 1991 CarswellOnt 110, refd to. [para. 16, footnote 11].

R. v. Ewanchuk (S.B.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 330; 235 N.R. 323; 232 A.R. 1; 195 W.A.C. 1; 131 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 22 C.R(5th) 1; 68 Alta. L.R.(3d) 1; 169 D.L.R.(4th) 193; [1999] 6 W.W.R. 333; 1999 CarswellAlta 99, refd to. [para. 17, footnote 12].

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; 106 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 48 C.R.(4th) 1; 135 D.L.R.(4th) 20; 1996 CarswellNB 259, refd to. [para. 17, footnote 13].

R. v. M.L.M., [1994] 2 S.C.R. 3; 166 N.R. 241; 131 N.S.R.(2d) 79; 371 A.P.R. 79; 89 C.C.C.(3d) 96; 30 C.R.(4th) 154; J.E. 94-903, refd to. [para. 17, footnote 14].

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352; 3 C.R.(4th) 302; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 397; 1991 CarswellOnt 80; J.E. 91-603, refd to. [para. 19, footnote 15].

R. v. J.H.S., [2008] 2 S.C.R. 152; 375 N.R. 67; 265 N.S.R.(2d) 203; 848 A.P.R. 203; 293 D.L.R.(4th) 257; 57 C.R.(6th) 79; 2008 CarswellNS 270; 2008 SCC 30, refd to. [para. 19, footnote 16].

R. v. C.L.Y., [2008] 1 S.C.R. 5; 370 N.R. 284; 225 Man.R.(2d) 146; 419 W.A.C. 146; 227 C.C.C.(3d) 129; 53 C.R.(6th) 207; 289 D.L.R.(4th) 1; [2008] 2 W.W.R. 1; 2008 CarswellMan 19; 2008 SCC 2, refd to. [para. 19, footnote 17].

R. v. Van (D.) (2009), 388 N.R. 200; 251 O.A.C. 295; 2009 SCC 22, refd to. [para. 19, footnote 18].

R. v. Parent (R.), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 761; 268 N.R. 372; 41 C.R.(5th) 199; 154 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 199 D.L.R.(4th) 622; 2001 CarswellQue 851; 2001 SCC 30, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 19].

R. v. Ogg-Moss, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 173; 54 N.R. 81; 5 O.A.C. 81; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 116; 41 C.R.(3d) 297; 11 D.L.R.(4th) 549; 12 W.C.B. 435, refd to. [para. 30, footnote 21].

R. v. Handy (J.), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 908; 290 N.R. 1; 160 O.A.C. 201; 164 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 1 C.R.(6th) 203; 213 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 61 O.R.(3d) 415; 2002 CarswellOnt 1968; 2002 SCC 56, refd to. [para. 44, footnote 22].

R. v. Morin, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 345; 88 N.R. 161; 30 O.A.C. 81; 66 C.R.(3d) 1; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 1988 CarswellOnt 967, refd to. [para. 49, footnote 23].

R. v. Kootenay (C.M.) (1994), 149 A.R. 41; 63 W.A.C. 41; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 109; 27 C.R.(4th) 376; 1994 CarswellAlta 321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 54, footnote 24].

R. v. Profit (K.G.), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 637; 159 N.R. 395; 68 O.A.C. 37; 24 C.R.(4th) 279; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 232; 15 O.R.(3d) 803; 21 W.C.B.(2d) 170, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 25].

Hill et al. v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board et al., [2007] 3 S.C.R. 129; 368 N.R. 1; 230 O.A.C. 260; 50 C.R.(3d) 279; 284 D.L.R.(4th) 620; 50 C.C.L.T.(4th) 1; 2007 CarswellOnt 6265; J.E. 2007-1867; 2007 SCC 41, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 26].

R. v. Marquard (D.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 81; 66 O.A.C. 161; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 25 C.R.(4th) 1; 108 D.L.R.(4th) 47; 1993 CarswellOnt 995, refd to. [para. 56, footnote 27].

R. v. Khelawon (R.), [2006] 2 S.C.R. 787; 355 N.R. 267; 220 O.A.C. 338; 215 C.C.C.(3d) 161; 42 C.R.(6th) 1; 274 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 2006 CarswellOnt 7825; J.E. 2007-28; 2006 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 56, footnote 28].

R. v. Lising (R.) et al., [2005] 3 S.C.R. 343; 341 N.R. 147; 217 B.C.A.C. 65; 358 W.A.C. 65; 2005 SCC 66, refd to. [para. 67, footnote 29].

R. v. Pires (F.B.) - see R. v. Lising (R.) et al.

R. v. McIvor (J.M.), [2008] 1 S.C.R. 285; 372 N.R. 135; 252 B.C.A.C. 41; 422 W.A.C. 41; 229 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 2008 SCC 11, refd to. [para. 67, footnote 29].

R. v. DeSousa, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 944; 142 N.R. 1; 56 O.A.C. 109; 95 D.L.R.(4th) 595; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 124; 11 C.R.R.(2d) 193; 1992 CarswellOnt 100; 9 O.R.(3d) 544, refd to. [para. 70, footnote 30].

R. v. Groot (N.) , [1999] 3 S.C.R. 664; 144 C.C.C.(3d) 287; 44 W.C.B.(2d) 214, refd to. [para. 70, footnote 31].

R. v. Murphy and Bieneck,  [1981]  6 W.W.R. 197; 30 A.R. 13; 60 C.C.C.(2d) 1; 21 C.R.(3d) 39 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71, footnote 32].

R. v. Pittiman (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 381; 346 N.R. 65; 209 O.A.C. 388; 206 C.C.C.(3d) 6; 36 C.R.(6th) 87; 264 D.L.R.(4th) 1; J.E. 2006-672; 2006 CarswellOnt 1695; 68 W.C.B.(2d) 612; 2006 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 73, footnote 33].

R. v. Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 524; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351; 26 C.R.N.S. 1; 1974 CarswellOnt 8, refd to. [para. 73, footnote 34].

R. v. Ferris (J.M.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 756; 174 N.R. 158; 162 A.R. 108; 83 W.A.C. 108; 34 C.R.(4th) 26; 1994 CarswellAlta 750, refd to. [para. 100, footnote 35].

Counsel:

Mark Huyser-Wierenga, for the Crown;

David W. Ross (Laurier Law Office), for the accused.

This matter was heard on various dates between April 2005 and February 26, 2009, before Watson, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on August 5, 2009.