R. v. Robichaud (N.), 2012 NBCA 87

• Judge: Richard, Bell and Quigg, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (New Brunswick)
• Case Date: June 20, 2012
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: 2012 NBCA 87;(2012), 395 N.B.R.(2d) 337 (CA)

R. v. Robichaud (N.) (2012), 395 N.B.R.(2d) 337 (CA);

    395 R.N.-B.(2e) 337; 1023 A.P.R. 337

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2012] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.039

Renvoi temp.: [2012] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.039

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Nicolas Robichaud (respondent)

(158-11-CA; 2012 NBCA 87)

Indexed As: R. v. Robichaud (N.)

Répertorié: R. v. Robichaud (N.)

New Brunswick Court of Appeal

Richard, Bell and Quigg, JJ.A.

October 18, 2012.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused, while riding a jet ski, hit a low lying speed boat, killing one person and injuring another. The accused was charged with having caused: (1) death while his ability to operate a vessel was impaired by alcohol (s. 255(3) of the Criminal Code); (2) bodily harm while his ability to operate a vessel was impaired by alcohol (s. 255(2)); (3) death while operating a vessel in a dangerous manner (s. 249(4)); and (4) bodily harm while operating a vessel in a dangerous manner (s. 249(3)). A Provincial Court judge acquitted the accused of all of the charges. The Crown appealed the acquittals on the two counts of dangerous operation of a vessel.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1486

Ships and vessels - Dangerous operation of - The accused, while riding a jet ski, hit a low lying speed boat, killing one person and injuring another - The Crown appealed the accused's acquittals on charges of causing bodily harm and causing death, while operating a vessel in a dangerous manner (Criminal Code, ss. 249(3) and 249(4)) - The Crown submitted, inter alia, that the trial judge erred by failing to consider all of the evidence - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal rejected the submission - The Crown was attempting to frame mixed fact and law questions as questions of law alone - There was no ground of appeal of "unreasonable acquittal" - Such a ground would be incompatible with the presumption of innocence and the prosecution's burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt - See paragraphs 1 to 9.

Criminal Law - Topic 1486

Ships and vessels - Dangerous operation of - The accused, while riding a jet ski, hit a low lying speed boat, killing one person and injuring another - The Crown appealed the accused's acquittals on charges of causing bodily harm and causing death, while operating a vessel in a dangerous manner (Criminal Code, ss. 249(3) and 249(4)) - The Crown submitted, inter alia, that the trial judge misapprehended the applicable test for mens rea - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal rejected the submission - The focus of the mens rea analysis was on whether the dangerous manner of operating the vessel, presuming the actus reus had been established, was a marked departure from the standard of care which a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances - Both counsel agreed that the trial judge had properly formulated the marked departure test - They disagreed respecting the trial judge's assessment of the facts en route to determining whether the accused's conduct met the marked departure requirement - Since that analysis went only to the issue of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of mens rea, it would not, in any circumstance, constitute a question of law alone - The matter of sufficiency of proof was a question of fact for the trial judge and not a question of law - Therefore, the Crown had no jurisdiction to appeal on this ground - See paragraphs 14 and 15.

Criminal Law - Topic 4351

Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Direction regarding burden of proof and reasonable doubt - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 1486 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4859

Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Question of fact or question of mixed law and fact - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 1486 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4868

Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Failure to consider evidence - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 1486 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4975

Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Appeal from an acquittal - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 1486 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 1486

Infractions contre la personne et la réputation - Bateaux et embarcations - Conduite dangereuse - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 1486 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4351

Procédure - Exposé ou directives - Jury ou juge seul - Directives concernant le fardeau de la preuve et le doute raisonnable - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4351 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4859

Appels - Actes criminels - Moyens d'appel - Question de fait ou erreur de droit et de fait - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4859 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4868

Appels - Actes criminels - Motifs d'appel - Défaut de tenir compte d'éléments de preuve - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4868 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4975

Appels - Actes criminels - Pouvoirs de la Cour d'appel - Appel d'un acquittement - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4975 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. J.M.H., [2011] 3 S.C.R. 197; 421 N.R. 76; 283 O.A.C. 379; 2011 SCC 45, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Walker (B.G.), [2008] 2 S.C.R. 245; 375 N.R. 228; 310 Sask.R. 305; 423 W.A.C. 305; 2008 SCC 34, appld. [para. 9].

R. v. Biniaris (J.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 381; 252 N.R. 204; 134 B.C.A.C. 161; 219 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 15, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Sutton (K.M.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 595; 262 N.R. 384; 230 N.B.R.(2d) 205; 593 A.P.R. 205; 2000 SCC 50, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268; 2006 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Noel (P.J.) (2010), 358 N.B.R.(2d) 108; 924 A.P.R. 108; 2010 NBCA 28, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Martin (G.W.) (2010), 361 N.B.R.(2d) 251; 931 A.P.R. 251; 2010 NBCA 41, leave to appeal denied (2011), 417 N.R. 395 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Morin, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 345; 88 N.R. 161; 30 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. G.B. et al. (No. 3), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 57; 111 N.R. 62; 86 Sask.R. 142, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. R.S.L. (2006), 300 N.B.R.(2d) 24; 782 A.P.R. 24; 2006 NBCA 64, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. L.C.M. (2011), 368 N.B.R.(2d) 194; 949 A.P.R. 194; 2011 NBCA 14, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Pleasance (C.W.) (2012), 382 N.B.R.(2d) 292; 988 A.P.R. 292 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Beatty (J.R.), [2008] 1 S.C.R. 49; 371 N.R. 119; 251 B.C.A.C. 7; 420 W.A.C. 7; 2008 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Roy (R.L.) (2012), 430 N.R. 201; 321 B.C.A.C. 112; 547 W.A.C. 112; 2012 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Sunbeam Corp. (Canada) Ltd., [1969] S.C.R. 221, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Poirier (J.C.), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 24; 221 N.R. 371; 160 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 37; 494 A.P.R. 37, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Creighton, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 3; 157 N.R. 1; 65 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 16].

Counsel:

Avocats:

Cameron H. Gunn, for the appellant;

James J. Matheson, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 20, 2012, by Richard, Bell and Quigg, JJ.A., of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal. Bell, J.A., delivered the following decision for the court in both official languages on October 18, 2012.