R. v. R.H.L., 2008 NSCA 100

• Judge: Cromwell, Saunders and Hamilton, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: October 14, 2008
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2008 NSCA 100;(2008), 270 N.S.R.(2d) 123 (CA)

R. v. R.H.L. (2008), 270 N.S.R.(2d) 123 (CA);

    865 A.P.R. 123

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2008] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.053

R.H.L. (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(CAC 292284; 2008 NSCA 100)

Indexed As: R. v. R.H.L.

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Cromwell, Saunders and Hamilton, JJ.A.

October 22, 2008.

Summary:

The accused, a young person within the meaning of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, was convicted of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty contrary to s. 270(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. He appealed the conviction.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision not reported in this series of reports (2008 NSSC 382), dismissed the appeal. The accused applied for leave to appeal.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal, but dismissed the appeal.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Courts - Topic 583

Judges - Duties - Re reasons for decisions - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4684 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 213

Common law defences - De minimis or trifling matters - [See Criminal Law - Topic 7652 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4351

Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - A young offender was convicted of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty - He appealed the conviction - The summary conviction appeal court (SCAC) dismissed the appeal - The accused appealed again, arguing that the SCAC judge erred in failing to set aside the conviction because the trial judge erred in her application of R. v. D.W. - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that there was no merit to this submission - While the trial judge did not formally refer to R. v. D.W., the case and its application had been mentioned by both counsel - The SCAC judge averted to the correct legal principles before assuring himself that the trial judge had conducted the proper reasonable doubt analysis and assessed the evidence against the required criminal standard - See paragraph 38.

Criminal Law - Topic 4684

Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Reasons for judgment - Sufficiency of - A young offender was convicted of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty - He appealed the conviction - The summary conviction appeal court (SCAC) dismissed the appeal - The accused appealed again, arguing that the SCAC judge erred in failing to set aside the conviction because the trial judge's reasons were inadequate - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court held that the trial judge's brief oral decision rendered shortly after hearing the evidence and submissions was sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review by the SCAC - The verdict was "intelligible" because the trial judge's reasons provided a logical connection between the verdict and the basis for that verdict, having regard to the evidence, the submissions of counsel and the history of the trial - The trial judge's reasons were sufficient to respond to the substance of what was in issue in the case - See paragraphs 29 to 37.

Criminal Law - Topic 7601

Summary conviction proceedings - Appeal to a court of appeal - General - A young offender was convicted in provincial court of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty contrary to s. 270(1)(a) of the Criminal Code - He appealed the conviction - The summary conviction appeal court (SCAC.) dismissed the appeal - The accused appealed again - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal noted that appeals from the SCAC were limited to questions of law alone (Criminal Code, s. 839(1)) - Further, the error of law required to ground jurisdiction in the Court of Appeal was that of the SCAC judge (i.e., the Court of Appeal would be considering an appeal from the SCAC, not a de novo appeal from the trial court) - The Court of Appeal would have to determine whether the SCAC erred in law in the statement or application of the principles governing the review by the SCAC of the trial verdict - See paragraphs 19 to 24.

Criminal Law - Topic 7652

Summary conviction proceedings - Appeals - Grounds - Error of law - The accused, a young offender, was arrested for causing a disturbance when police tried to talk to him about having been in a fight - At the police station, while in an interview room, the accused allegedly planted his feet, put his shoulder down and shoved it into a police officer's chest - He was charged and subsequently convicted of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty (Criminal Code, s. 270(1)(a)) - He appealed the conviction - The summary conviction appeal court (SCAC) dismissed the appeal - The accused appealed again, arguing that the SCAC judge erred in failing to set aside the conviction because of the way in which the trial judge dealt with the defence of accident and the principle of de minimis non curat lex - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that there was no merit to this submission - The SCAC judge was correct in the conclusion that the trial judge made no reversible error in her consideration of the burden of proof of the element of intention respecting whether this was an accident - The SCAC judge made no error in concluding that the principle of de minimis non curat lex had no application in this case because the evidence did not support such a finding - See paragraphs 29 to 35.

Criminal Law - Topic 7659

Summary conviction proceedings - Appeals - Grounds - Verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence - The accused, a young offender, was arrested for causing a disturbance when police tried to talk to him about having been in a fight - At the police station, while in an interview room, the accused allegedly planted his feet, put his shoulder down and shoved it into a police officer's chest - He was charged and subsequently convicted of unlawfully assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty (Criminal Code, s. 270(1)(a)) - He appealed the conviction - The summary conviction appeal court (SCAC) dismissed the appeal - The accused appealed again, arguing that the SCAC judge erred in upholding the verdict because the conviction was unreasonable or not supported by the evidence - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the SCAC judge did not err by concluding that the verdict was reasonable and supported by the evidence - See paragraphs 27 to 28.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Travers (R.H.) (2001), 193 N.S.R.(2d) 263; 602 A.P.R. 263; 2001 NSCA 71, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Shrubsall (W.C.) (2000), 182 N.S.R.(2d) 351; 563 A.P.R. 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Nickerson (W.S.) (1999), 178 N.S.R.(2d) 189; 549 A.P.R. 189 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. C.S.M. (2004), 223 N.S.R.(2d) 311; 705 A.P.R. 311 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Hayes (K.J.A.) (2008), 263 N.S.R.(2d) 314; 843 A.P.R. 314 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Corbett (1973), 1 N.R. 258; 14 C.C.C.(2d) 385 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Yebes (1987), 78 N.R. 351; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 417 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Clark (D.M.), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 6; 329 N.R. 10; 208 B.C.A.C. 6; 344 W.A.C. 6, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Abourached (N.) (2007), 259 N.S.R.(2d) 379; 828 A.P.R. 379 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Robbins (R.) (2008), 269 N.S.R.(2d) 363; 860 A.P.R. 363; 2008 NSCA 93, refd to. [para. 27].

Lake v. Canada (Minister of Justice) (2008), 373 N.R. 339; 236 O.A.C. 371 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Dinardo (J.) (2008), 374 N.R. 198; 2008 SCC 24, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. R.E.M. (2008), 380 N.R. 47; 260 B.C.A.C. 40; 439 W.A.C. 40 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Walker (B.G.) (2008), 375 N.R. 228; 310 Sask.R. 305; 423 W.A.C. 305 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 36].

Counsel:

Chandra Gosine, for the appellant;

Peter P. Rosinski, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on October 14, 2008, by Cromwell, Saunders and Hamilton, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The following decision of the court was delivered by Saunders, J.A., on October 22, 2008.