R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99

JurisdictionManitoba
JudgeMadam Justice Holly C. Beard,Madam Justice Diana M. Cameron,Madam Justice Janice L. leMaistre
Citation2019 MBCA 99
Docket NumberAR18-30-08995
CourtCourt of Appeal (Manitoba)
Date07 October 2019
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
6 practice notes
  • R. v. Tessier, 2022 SCC 35
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 14 Octubre 2022
    ...2014 NSCA 6, 339 N.S.R. (2d) 277; Yergeau v. R., 2021 QCCA 1827; R. v. Baylis, 2015 ONCA 477, 326 C.C.C. (3d) 18; R. v. Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99, [2020] 3 W.W.R. 657; R. v. Lambert, 2018 NLCA 39, 363 C.C.C. (3d) 397; R. v. Bottineau, 2011 ONCA 194, 269 C.C.C. (3d) 227; R. v. M. (D.), 2012 ......
  • SIDHU v R., 2020 SKQB 44
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • 24 Febrero 2020
    ...a question of fact, and deference is owed to the trier of fact’s determination in that regard. The recent decision of R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 starting at para. 18, discussed the role of an appellate court reviewing a trier of fact’s use of inferential reasoning. Justice leMai......
  • R v Perswain,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
    • 22 Marzo 2023
    ...open to him” (at para 67). (See also R v McIvor, 2021 MBCA 55 at paras 33-37; R v Anderson, 2020 ONCA 780 at paras 24-31; R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 at paras 17-19; and R v Fedyk, 2018 MBCA 74 at para 25, aff’d 2019 SCC [10] The accused argues that the unreasonable verdict is the result of er......
  • R v Sutherland,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
    • 24 Febrero 2022
    ...appeal, an appellate court must review jury instructions “on a standard of adequacy, not perfection” (R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 at para 65).  Taking a functional approach, jury instructions must be looked at in their entirety and in the context of the trial to de......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • R. v. Tessier, 2022 SCC 35
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 14 Octubre 2022
    ...2014 NSCA 6, 339 N.S.R. (2d) 277; Yergeau v. R., 2021 QCCA 1827; R. v. Baylis, 2015 ONCA 477, 326 C.C.C. (3d) 18; R. v. Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99, [2020] 3 W.W.R. 657; R. v. Lambert, 2018 NLCA 39, 363 C.C.C. (3d) 397; R. v. Bottineau, 2011 ONCA 194, 269 C.C.C. (3d) 227; R. v. M. (D.), 2012 ......
  • SIDHU v R., 2020 SKQB 44
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • 24 Febrero 2020
    ...a question of fact, and deference is owed to the trier of fact’s determination in that regard. The recent decision of R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 starting at para. 18, discussed the role of an appellate court reviewing a trier of fact’s use of inferential reasoning. Justice leMai......
  • R v Perswain,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
    • 22 Marzo 2023
    ...open to him” (at para 67). (See also R v McIvor, 2021 MBCA 55 at paras 33-37; R v Anderson, 2020 ONCA 780 at paras 24-31; R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 at paras 17-19; and R v Fedyk, 2018 MBCA 74 at para 25, aff’d 2019 SCC [10] The accused argues that the unreasonable verdict is the result of er......
  • R v Sutherland,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
    • 24 Febrero 2022
    ...appeal, an appellate court must review jury instructions “on a standard of adequacy, not perfection” (R v Ponace, 2019 MBCA 99 at para 65).  Taking a functional approach, jury instructions must be looked at in their entirety and in the context of the trial to de......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT