R. v. Neville (S.M.), (2015) 477 N.R. 96 (SCC)

• Judge: McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Moldaver, Côté and Brown, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: November 05, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2015), 477 N.R. 96 (SCC);2015 SCC 49

R. v. Neville (S.M.) (2015), 477 N.R. 96 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2015] N.R. TBEd. NO.011

Steven Michael Neville (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)

(36412; 2015 SCC 49; 2015 CSC 49)

Indexed As: R. v. Neville (S.M.)

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Moldaver, Côté and Brown, JJ.

November 5, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of the second degree murder of Flynn and the attempted murder of Dwyer. The accused appealed the convictions.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal, Rowe, J.A., dissenting, in a judgment reported (2015), 365 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 1138 A.P.R. 1, dismissed the appeal. The accused appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial on both charges.

Criminal Law - Topic 4391.2

Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions following questions by jury - The accused got out of a car as it passed Dwyer and Flynn when they started to run after the car - A fight was engaged - Within seconds the accused stabbed Dwyer - Dwyer succumbed to the wounds, ran away and fell - The accused and Flynn immediately engaged in a fight - Again, within seconds the accused stabbed Flynn - Flynn was able to return blows - Then a stab wound inflicted by the accused to Flynn's temple pierced his skull and brain - It was a fatal wound - The accused was convicted of the second degree murder of Flynn and the attempted murder of Dwyer - He appealed the convictions, asserting that the trial judge erred in failing to adequately respond to the jury's request to clarify whether "the legal definition of 'to kill' is the same as 'to murder'" - The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - Reference back to the written instructions, together with the reminder that additional questions could be put, was a sufficient answer in the particular circumstances - The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the accused's appeal and remitted the matter for a new trial on both charges - The trial judge should have clarified the jury's concern respecting "to kill" and "to murder" rather than simply referring them to the earlier written instructions - There was a possibility that the jury could have misunderstood what had to be proved to support guilty verdicts - The evidence was not so overwhelming that the verdict would necessarily have been the same but for the error.

Criminal Law - Topic 5041

Appeals - Indictable offences - Dismissal of appeal if no prejudice, substantial wrong or miscarriage results - Where directions or jury charge incomplete or in error - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4391.2 ].

Counsel:

[none disclosed].

Solicitors of Record:

[none disclosed].

This appeal was heard on November 5, 2015, before McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Moldaver, Côté and Brown, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

On November 5, 2015, McLachlin, C.J.C., delivered the following judgment orally in both official languages for the Court.