R. v. Randle (D.A.), (2016) 384 B.C.A.C. 243 (CA)
Judge | Bauman, C.J.B.C., Saunders and Willcock, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
Case Date | December 18, 2015 |
Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
Citations | (2016), 384 B.C.A.C. 243 (CA);2016 BCCA 125 |
R. v. Randle (D.A.) (2016), 384 B.C.A.C. 243 (CA);
663 W.A.C. 243
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2016] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MR.033
Regina (respondent) v. Darin Andrew Randle (appellant)
(CA42479; 2016 BCCA 125)
Indexed As: R. v. Randle (D.A.)
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Bauman, C.J.B.C., Saunders and Willcock, JJ.A.
March 16, 2016.
Summary:
Police were investigating the disappearance of Cornish, who had been the accused's friend and partner in marijuana grow operations. The investigation included a "Mr. Big" operation targeting the accused. One scenario involved exposing the accused to the mock execution of a police informant. Subsequently, the accused admitted to an undercover officer that he had killed Cornish while acting in self-defence and then burned the body. The statement was admitted at trial. The accused was found guilty of improperly or indecently interfering with or offering an indignity to human remains (Criminal Code, s. 182(d)). The accused appealed, arguing that the trial judge misapprehended material evidence, improperly assessed the credibility of the accused's admissions, and erred in failing to find that the Mr. Big operation was an abuse of process.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Criminal Law - Topic 253
General principles - Abuse of process - What constitutes - See paragraphs 84 to 90.
Criminal Law - Topic 4866
Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Misapprehension of evidence - See paragraphs 45 to 61.
Criminal Law - Topic 5337.1
Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Admissibility - "Mr. Big" confessions - See paragraphs 62 to 90.
Police - Topic 3106
Powers - Investigation - Stratagem and subterfuge (incl. trickery) - See paragraphs 62 to 90.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Langlet (D.L.R.), [2013] B.C.T.C. Uned. 2274; 2013 BCSC 2274, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Hart (N.L.), [2014] 2 S.C.R. 544; 461 N.R. 1; 353 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 222; 1099 A.P.R. 222; 2014 SCC 52, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Earhart (B.A.) (2011), 313 B.C.A.C. 226; 533 W.A.C. 226; 2011 BCCA 490, refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Sinclair (T.), [2011] 3 S.C.R. 3; 418 N.R. 282; 268 Man.R.(2d) 225; 520 W.A.C. 225; 2011 SCC 40, refd to. [para. 26].
R. v. Mack (D.R.), [2014] 3 S.C.R. 3; 462 N.R. 380; 580 A.R. 41; 620 W.A.C. 41; 2014 SCC 58, refd to. [para. 42].
R. v. Derbyshire (B.L.) (2014), 353 N.S.R.(2d) 40; 1115 A.P.R. 40; 2014 NSSC 371, dist. [para. 43].
R. v. Harper, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 2; 40 N.R. 255, refd to. [para. 45].
R. v. Lohrer (A.W.), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 732; 329 N.R. 1; 208 B.C.A.C. 1; 344 W.A.C. 1; 2004 SCC 80, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Morrissey (R.J.) (1995), 80 O.A.C. 161; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Beaudry (A.), [2007] 1 S.C.R. 190; 356 N.R. 323; 2007 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Swales (M.G.) (2014), 360 B.C.A.C. 291; 617 W.A.C. 291; 2014 BCCA 350, refd to. [para. 47].
R. v. Dinardo (J.) (2008), 374 N.R. 198; 2008 SCC 24, refd to. [para. 54].
H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. (2005), 333 N.R. 1; 262 Sask.R. 1; 347 W.A.C. 1; 2005 SCC 25, refd to. [para. 58].
R. v. West (J.B.) (2015), 376 B.C.A.C. 301; 646 W.A.C. 301; 2015 BCCA 379, refd to. [para. 69].
R. v. Johnston (G.D.) (2015), 381 B.C.A.C. 1; 659 W.A.C. 1; 2016 BCCA 3, consd. [para. 73].
R. v. Allgood (G.M.) (2015), 465 Sask.R. 120; 649 W.A.C. 120; 327 C.C.C.(3d) 196; 2015 SKCA 88, refd to. [para. 75].
R. v. Laflamme, 2015 QCCA 1517, refd to. [para. 88].
Counsel:
C.J. Nowlin, for the appellant;
J.M. Gordon, Q.C., for the respondent.
This appeal was heard at Vancouver, B.C., on December 18, 2015, before Bauman, C.J.B.C., Saunders and Willcock, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Willcock, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the court on March 16, 2016.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Table of cases
...313, [1998] JQ no 3656 (CA) .......................................................................................... 290 R v Randle, 2016 BCCA 125 ................................................................................327 R v Regan, 2002 SCC 12 .........................................
-
Preliminary Matters and Remedies
...195 Courts of Appeal have declined, post- Hart , to issue stays based on Mr. Big operations in R v Johnston , 2016 BCCA 3; R v Randle , 2016 BCCA 125; R v Magoon , 2016 ABCA 412; and R v Kelly , 2017 ONCA 621. A retrial was ordered in R v Jeanvenne , 2016 ONCA 106, though primarily for othe......
-
Table of cases
...1 SCR 588, 33 CCC (3d) 289, [1987] SCJ No 23 ..................................................431, 432, 433, 434, 440, 442 R v Randle, 2016 BCCA 125, 384 BCAC 243 ..................................................... 453 R v Rao (1984), 46 OR (2d) 80, 40 CR (3d) 1, [1984] OJ No 3180 (CA) .......
-
Procedural Fairness as a Principle of Fundamental Justice
...116–17. 335 As in R v Laflamme , 2015 QCCA 1517. Contrast cases where the “Mr Big” procedure was found not to be abusive: R v Randle , 2016 BCCA 125; R v Yakimchuk , 2017 ABCA 101. 336 Criminal Code , above note 85, ss 720–726.2, and particularly s 723. See also R v Morrison , 2016 SKQB 25......
-
R. v. F.I.,
...Crown from putting in all ten admissions: R. v Mack, 2014 SCC 58 at para. 34, [2014] 3 SCR 3; R. v Randle, 2016 BCCA 125 at paras. 81-2, 384 BCAC [Emphasis added] [60] ......
-
R. v. Wentworth,
...does not prevent the Crown from putting in all ten admissions: R. v. Mack, 2014 SCC 58 at para. 34, [2014] 3 SCR 3; R. v. Randle, 2016 BCCA 125 at paras. 81-2, 384 BCAC [69] In cases involving repeated confessions by an accused in ......
-
R. v. Derbyshire (B.L.), (2016) 377 N.S.R.(2d) 174 (CA)
...approved of violent acts being done to non-members, including women (see also R. v. Johnston , 2016 BCCA 3 at para. 51 and R. v. Randle , 2016 BCCA 125). [103] However in R. v. Laflamme , 2015 QCCA 1517, (leave to appeal ref'd, [2015] S.C.C.A. No. 479) violent scenarios were used to demonst......
-
R. v. Wentworth,
...evidence.’”: see e.g., R. v. Moir, 2016 BCSC 1720, at para. 31, aff’d 2020 BCCA 116, citing R. v. Randle 2016 BCCA 125.[1] In Moir, the trial judge’s reliance on the detail and sequence of events, the internal and external consistencies in the confessio......
-
Table of cases
...1 SCR 588, 33 CCC (3d) 289, [1987] SCJ No 23 ..................................................431, 432, 433, 434, 440, 442 R v Randle, 2016 BCCA 125, 384 BCAC 243 ..................................................... 453 R v Rao (1984), 46 OR (2d) 80, 40 CR (3d) 1, [1984] OJ No 3180 (CA) .......
-
Procedural Fairness as a Principle of Fundamental Justice
...116–17. 335 As in R v Laflamme , 2015 QCCA 1517. Contrast cases where the “Mr Big” procedure was found not to be abusive: R v Randle , 2016 BCCA 125; R v Yakimchuk , 2017 ABCA 101. 336 Criminal Code , above note 85, ss 720–726.2, and particularly s 723. See also R v Morrison , 2016 SKQB 25......
-
Table of cases
...313, [1998] JQ no 3656 (CA) .......................................................................................... 290 R v Randle, 2016 BCCA 125 ................................................................................327 R v Regan, 2002 SCC 12 .........................................
-
Preliminary Matters and Remedies
...195 Courts of Appeal have declined, post- Hart , to issue stays based on Mr. Big operations in R v Johnston , 2016 BCCA 3; R v Randle , 2016 BCCA 125; R v Magoon , 2016 ABCA 412; and R v Kelly , 2017 ONCA 621. A retrial was ordered in R v Jeanvenne , 2016 ONCA 106, though primarily for othe......