R. v. Skinner (S.), (1998) 222 N.R. 228 (SCC)

• Judge: Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: February 19, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1998), 222 N.R. 228 (SCC);1998 CanLII 809 (SCC);122 CCC (3d) 31;[1998] 1 SCR 298;13 CR (5th) 241;165 NSR (2d) 145;222 NR 228;[1998] SCJ No 20 (QL);495 APR 145;50 CRR (2d) 136

R. v. Skinner (S.) (1998), 222 N.R. 228 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

Temp. Cite: [1998] N.R. TBEd. FE.023

Stacey Skinner (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)

(25831)

Indexed As: R. v. Skinner (S.)

Supreme Court of Canada

Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ.

February 19, 1998.

Summary:

Skinner and five others were charged jointly with aggravated assault following a vicious beating that left the victim (Watts) brain-damaged. Skinner was also charged with the aggravated assault of another person (Charman).

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported 148 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 429 A.P.R. 321, convicted all accused. In a subsequent decision (149 N.S.R.(2d) 104; 432 A.P.R. 104), the court sentenced Skinner to eight years' imprisonment for the Watts assault and two years (consecutive) for the Charman assault. Skinner appealed against conviction and sentence. Skinner claimed that the Crown failed to make timely dis­closure of four witness statements and that the sentences were manifestly excessive.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, Bate­man, J.A., dissenting, in a judgment reported 158 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 466 A.P.R. 81, dismissed the Watts conviction appeal. The court unanimously dismissed the Charman convic­tion appeal. The court held that the nondis­closed statements were of no weight and there was no reasonable probability that, had this information been available at or before the trial, the trial outcome might have been different. Bateman, J.A., for her reasons previously stated in R. v. Dixon (S.), would have ordered a new trial. Skinner appealed respecting the Watts conviction.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.

Criminal Law - Topic 4505

Procedure - Trial - Special duties of Crown - Duty to disclose evidence prior to trial - The six accused were convicted of aggravated assault - The Crown innocently failed to disclose four witness statements - Knowledge of the existence of the witness statements came to counsel during the trial, but not Skinner's counsel - Other counsel chose not to seek production, raising the issue of due diligence and whether a tacti­cal decision was made not to pursue them - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the other counsel appeared to make a tactical decision not to pursue disclosure, which was an important factor in deter­mining whether to order a new trial - However, Skinner's counsel was not guilty of lack of diligence and had not made a tactical decision - However, Skinner still had to establish that there was a reasonable probability that had the statements been disclosed, the trial outcome might have been different - The court stated that, as in the case of the other accused, had the statements been disclosed, there was no reasonable probability of a different out­come - Accordingly, Skinner's conviction appeal was dismissed - The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial - Although the nondisclosed statement would have had little effect on the reliability of the trial outcome, it did affect the overall fairness of the trial pro­cess - There was a reasonable possibility that Skinner's counsel could have garnered additional evidence flowing from the state­ment which may have been used at trial.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Dixon (S.) (1998), 222 N.R. 243 (S.C.C.), folld. [para. 1].

Counsel:

Warren Zimmer, for the appellant;

Kenneth W.F. Fiske, Q.C., and Richard B. Miller, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Warren K. Zimmer, Halifax, N.S., for the appellant;

The Nova Scotia Public Prosecution Ser­vice, Halifax, N.S., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on December 5, 1997, before Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

On February 19, 1998, Cory, J., delivered the following judgment in both official languages for the Supreme Court of Canada.