R. v. Perrone (C.), (2015) 468 N.R. 82 (SCC)

• Judge: McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Cromwell, Moldaver and Wagner, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: February 19, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2015), 468 N.R. 82 (SCC);2015 SCC 8;[2015] 1 SCR 473

R. v. Perrone (C.) (2015), 468 N.R. 82 (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. FE.030

Cladinoro Perrone (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(36021; 2015 SCC 8; 2015 CSC 8)

Indexed As: R. v. Perrone (C.)

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Cromwell, Moldaver and Wagner, JJ.

February 20, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of sexual assault. He appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial judge reached an unreasonable verdict.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal, MacInnes, J.A., dissenting, in a decision reported (2014), 306 Man.R.(2d) 299; 604 W.A.C. 299, dismissed the appeal. The accused appealed again.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 4300

Procedure - Trial judge - Duties and functions of - Respecting credibility of witnesses - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5020 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4865

Appeals - Indictable offences - Verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5020 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5020

Appeals - Indictable offences - Setting aside verdicts - Verdict  unreasonable or  unsupported by evidence - After a trial by judge alone where the only evidence consisted of the complainant's testimony, the accused was convicted of sexual assault - He appealed, arguing that the trial judge erred in her assessments of the complainant's evidence on the issues of credibility and reliability which led her to an unreasonable verdict - He claimed that the complainant's evidence was unreliable given her level of intoxication and her mental state, nor was it credible given her admission that she lied at the preliminary inquiry - The Manitoba Court of Appeal concluded that the trial judge was entitled to reach the conclusion that she did, namely, that the complainant's evidence, although displaying certain concerning elements, was nevertheless capable of proving the offence beyond a reasonable doubt - As such, the evidence was sufficient to allow a properly instructed jury or judge to convict - The accused appealed again - The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

Counsel:

[None disclosed].

Solicitors of Record:

[None disclosed].

This appeal was heard on February 19, 2015, before McLachlin, C.J.C., Abella, Cromwell, Moldaver and Wagner, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. The following decision was delivered orally for the court, in both official languages, by McLachlin, C.J.C., on February 20, 2015.