R v Ross
| Jurisdiction | Manitoba |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Manitoba) |
| Judge | Chief Justice Richard J. Chartier,Madam Justice Holly C. Beard,Madam Justice Jennifer A. Pfuetzner |
| Citation | 2018 MBCA 7 |
| Date | 06 February 2018 |
| Docket Number | AR16-30-08682 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
7 practice notes
-
R v DEZ
...by a trier of fact, not for mill run credibility cases: R v DSL, 2017 ABCA 161 at paras 16 to 18, [2017] AJ No 522 (QL); R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 10 to 12, [2018] MJ No. 22 [39] In the end, despite the able efforts of counsel for the appellant, the contentions against the conviction f......
-
R v Chahal
...are identified and might be misunderstood by a trier of fact: R v DSL, 2017 ABCA 161 at paras 16-18, [2017] AJ No 522 (QL); R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 10-12, [2018] MJ No 22 (QL). A child making an allegation of sexual assault does not fall into that category. A Vetrovec warning ought n......
-
R v Beaulieu
...[31] The jurisprudence has set out a high standard for reviewing a jury charge, as was recently explained by this Court in R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 20-28. Regarding the need to relate the evidence to the issues, this Court stated (at para 21): In instructing a jury, a trial judge must......
-
R v Soroush et al
...perfection, using a functional approach.  The charge is to be reviewed as a whole in the context of the entire trial (see R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at para 20; R v Calnen, 2019 SCC 6 at paras 8-9; and R v Goforth, 2022 SCC 25 at Sufficiency of the Jury Charge—Alibi Evidence [12......
Get Started for Free
7 cases
-
R v DEZ
...by a trier of fact, not for mill run credibility cases: R v DSL, 2017 ABCA 161 at paras 16 to 18, [2017] AJ No 522 (QL); R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 10 to 12, [2018] MJ No. 22 [39] In the end, despite the able efforts of counsel for the appellant, the contentions against the conviction f......
-
R v Chahal
...are identified and might be misunderstood by a trier of fact: R v DSL, 2017 ABCA 161 at paras 16-18, [2017] AJ No 522 (QL); R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 10-12, [2018] MJ No 22 (QL). A child making an allegation of sexual assault does not fall into that category. A Vetrovec warning ought n......
-
R v Beaulieu
...[31] The jurisprudence has set out a high standard for reviewing a jury charge, as was recently explained by this Court in R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at paras 20-28. Regarding the need to relate the evidence to the issues, this Court stated (at para 21): In instructing a jury, a trial judge must......
-
R v Soroush et al
...perfection, using a functional approach.  The charge is to be reviewed as a whole in the context of the entire trial (see R v Ross, 2018 MBCA 7 at para 20; R v Calnen, 2019 SCC 6 at paras 8-9; and R v Goforth, 2022 SCC 25 at Sufficiency of the Jury Charge—Alibi Evidence [12......
Get Started for Free
