R v Parr
| Jurisdiction | Nunavut |
| Court | Nunavut Court of Appeal (Canada) |
| Judge | The Honourable Mr. Justice Frans Slatter,The Honourable Madam Justice Jolaine Antonio,The Honourable Mr. Justice Kevin Feehan |
| Citation | 2020 NUCA 2 |
| Docket Number | 03-19-001 CAP |
| Date | 09 April 2020 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
14 practice notes
-
R v Kuliktana
...to be reinforced. The appellant’s counsel also mentions R v Mathewsie, 2016 NUCA 5, [2016] Nu J 28 (QL). To this might be added R v Parr, 2020 NUCA 2, [2020] Nu J No. 16 (QL). These cases are discussed [7] The appellant’s right of appeal comes to me pursuant to s 812(2) of the Criminal Code......
-
R v Coreman, 2021 ABCA 107
...SCC 48, [2015] 3 SCR 321. More fundamentally, an uneven scrutiny argument is not a proxy for reassessing credibility generally: R v Parr, 2020 NUCA 2 at para 42, citing Wanihadie at para 43; R v Mehari, 2020 SKCA 37 at paras 88-89, per Leurer JA (in dissent but not on this point). An appeal......
-
R v Strathdee, 2020 ABCA 306
...SCC 48, [2015] 3 SCR 321. More fundamentally, an uneven scrutiny argument is not a proxy for reassessing credibility generally: R v Parr, 2020 NUCA 2 at para 42, citing Wanihadie at para 43; R v Mehari, 2020 SKCA 37 at paras 88‑89, per Leurer JA (in dissent but not on this point). An appeal......
-
R v Sidhu, 2022 ABCA 66
...be requested from counsel; and, in appropriate cases, there may be cause for withdrawal of the plea”). Contra, The Queen v. Parr, 2020 NUCA 2, ¶ 54 (“While the failure of a sentencing judge to flag an intention to sentence outside the recommended range is strongly discour......
Get Started for Free
15 cases
-
R v Sidhu
...should be requested from counsel; and, in appropriate cases, there may be cause for withdrawal of the plea”). Contra, The Queen v. Parr, 2020 NUCA 2, ¶ 54 (“While the failure of a sentencing judge to flag an intention to sentence outside the recommended range is strongly discouraged, when t......
-
R v Kuliktana
...to be reinforced. The appellant’s counsel also mentions R v Mathewsie, 2016 NUCA 5, [2016] Nu J 28 (QL). To this might be added R v Parr, 2020 NUCA 2, [2020] Nu J No. 16 (QL). These cases are discussed [7] The appellant’s right of appeal comes to me pursuant to s 812(2) of the Criminal Code......
-
R v Coreman
...SCC 48, [2015] 3 SCR 321. More fundamentally, an uneven scrutiny argument is not a proxy for reassessing credibility generally: R v Parr, 2020 NUCA 2 at para 42, citing Wanihadie at para 43; R v Mehari, 2020 SKCA 37 at paras 88-89, per Leurer JA (in dissent but not on this point). An appeal......
-
R. v. Nahanee
...added.] [48] A similar result was obtained in Gabriel c. R., 2015 QCCA 1391, which cited both R. v. R.R.B. and Keough. [49] In R v. Parr, 2020 NUCA 2, the majority of the Nunavut Court of Appeal took a similar approach, concluding that a sentencing judge’s failure to advise counsel of his i......
Get Started for Free
