R. v. Munroe (R.A.), (1995) 79 O.A.C. 41 (CA)

• Judge: Griffiths, Galligan and Austin, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: January 19, 1995
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1995), 79 O.A.C. 41 (CA)

R. v. Munroe (R.A.) (1995), 79 O.A.C. 41 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Robert Allan Munroe (appellant)

(C15084)

Indexed As: R. v. Munroe (R.A.)

Ontario Court of Appeal

Griffiths, Galligan and Austin, JJ.A.

February 24, 1995.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of the second degree murder of his wife and sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for 12 years. The accused appealed the conviction and period of parole ineligi­bility. The only ground argued on the con­viction appeal was that the alleged inflam­matory address by Crown counsel deprived the accused of a fair hearing.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, Galligan, J.A., dissenting, dismissed the accused's appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 4419

Procedure - Opening and closing addresses - Summing up - Counsel - Clos­ing address - Intemperate or improper state­ments - An accused appealed his second degree murder conviction for kill­ing his wife, alleging that Crown counsel's jury address was inflammatory and deprived him of a fair trial - At trial defence coun­sel had objected to the address, the trial judge intervened, a motion for mistrial heard and dismissed before the charge, and the trial judge dealt with the matter in his charge - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction - The court held that parts of the address were inflammatory and clearly improper but the trial judge's intervention and charge adequately dealt with these matters - See paragraphs 1 to 53.

Criminal Law - Topic 5670

Punishments (sentence) - Imprisonment and parole - Parole - Period of ineligibil­ity - The accused was convicted of the second degree murder of his wife - He strangled his wife when she threatened to file what the accused claimed to be an unfounded incest complaint with the police - The jury made no recommenda­tion respecting parole ineligibility, however the trial judge sentenced the accused to life imprison­ment with­out eligibility for parole for 12 years - The Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed the sentence, noting, inter alia, that the attack on his wife was not an isolated event, but part of a pattern of violence which extended over several years - See para­graphs 54 to 57.

Cases Noticed:

Pisani v. R., [1971] S.C.R. 738; 1 C.C.C.(2d) 477, refd to. [paras. 36, 98].

R. v. Labarre (1978), 45 C.C.C.(2d) 171 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Grover (1990), 38 O.A.C. 219; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 532 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Grover, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 387; 131 N.R. 80; 50 O.A.C. 185; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 576, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Charest (1990), 28 Q.A.C. 258; 57 C.C.C.(3d) 312 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Daly (1992), 57 O.A.C. 70 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 43, 75].

R. v. Emkeit, [1974] S.C.R. 133; 6 C.C.C.(2d) 1, refd to. [paras. 46, 100].

R. v. Woods (1989), 32 O.A.C. 122; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 20 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 47, 100].

R. v. R. (1994), 74 O.A.C. 363; 20 O.R.(3d) 405 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 47, 108].

R. v. Finta, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 701; 165 N.R. 1; 70 O.A.C. 241; 88 C.C.C.(3d) 417; 112 D.L.R.(4th) 513; 28 C.R.(4th) 265; 20 C.R.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [paras. 48, 98].

R. v. Naglik, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 122; 157 N.R. 161; 65 O.A.C. 161; 83 C.C.C.(3d) 526, refd to. [para. 51].

Boucher v. R., [1955] S.C.R. 16, refd to. [para. 76].

R. v. Vallieres, [1970] 4 C.C.C. 69 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 77].

R. v. Roberts (1973), 14 C.C.C.(2d) 368 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 78].

R. v. Chambers (1989), 47 C.C.C.(3d) 503 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 102].

R. v. Cameron (1991), 44 O.A.C. 278; 64 C.C.C.(3d) 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 106].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 232(1) [paras. 16, 27]; sect. 232(2) [para. 27]; sect. 232(3) [para. 16].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Oshawa This Week, generally [para. 22].

Renaud, Gilles, Forceful Closing Addresses by Crown Counsel: A Com­ment on Daly (1992), 18 C.R.(4th) 297, p. 306 [para. 45].

Counsel:

Marc Rosenberg, for the appellant;

Eric Siebenmorgen, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on January 19, 1995, before Griffiths, Galligan and Austin, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was released on Febru­ary 24, 1995, including the following opin­ions:

Austin, J.A. (Griffiths, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 57;

Galligan, J.A., dissenting - see para­graphs 58 to 111.