R. v. White, (1975) 10 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 471 (NFDC)

• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: December 18, 1975
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1975), 10 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 471 (NFDC)

R. v. White (1975), 10 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 471 (NFDC);

    17 A.P.R. 471

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. White

Indexed As: R. v. White

Newfoundland District Court

Steele, D.C.J.

December 18, 1975.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge of criminal negligence against the accused under s. 203 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34. The accused ran down a pedestrian at night in good weather conditions in a lighted area on a straight road. The pedestrian was wearing a white sweater and was walking on the gravel shoulder of the road. The accused was travelling at an excessive speed and lost control of his motor vehicle just before striking the pedestrian. The accused failed to stop after striking the pedestrian. The accused had a blood-alcohol content reading of .12. The accused was charged with criminal negligence. The Newfoundland District Court set out the test of criminal negligence - See paragraphs 58 to 62.

The District Court held that the accused's impairment, the nature of his driving, and his leaving the scene of the accident showed a wanton and reckless disregard for the lives and safety of others - See paragraphs 26 to 86.

Criminal Law - Topic 1351

Offences against the person - Motor vehicle - Criminal negligence - Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 202, 203 - What constitutes criminal negligence - The accused ran down a pedestrian at night in good weather conditions in a lighted area on a straight road - The pedestrian was wearing a white sweater and was walking on the gravel shoulder of the road - The accused was travelling at excessive speed and lost control of his motor vehicle just before striking the pedestrian - The accused failed to stop after striking the pedestrian - The accused had a blood-alcohol content reading of .12 - The Newfoundland District Court set out the test of criminal negligence - See paragraphs 58 to 62 - The District Court held that the accused's conduct showed a wanton and reckless disregard for the lives and safety of others and convicted the accused - Paragraphs 26 to 86.

Criminal Law - Topic 1352

Offences against the person - Motor vehicle - Criminal negligence - Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 202, 203 - What constitutes - Element of mens rea - The Newfoundland District Court stated that the element of mens rea may be inferred from the wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others shown by the accused - Paragraphs 60 to 62.

Criminal Law - Topic 1354

Evidence - Relevant facts - Relevance and materiality - Materiality - Fact of impairment of accused in charge of criminal negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle resulting in the death of a pedestrian - The Newfoundland District Court stated that the fact of impairment was relevant to the issue of criminal negligence, but was not conclusive unless the evidence showed that the impairment was a cause of the accused's conduct - The District Court held that the accused's impairment contributed to the cause of the accident - Paragraphs 69 to 71.

Evidence - Topic 1191

Relevant facts - Relevance and materiality - Res gestae - Conduct of accused after an offence - The accused left the scene after running down and killing a pedestrian with his motor vehicle - The Newfoundland District Court held that leaving the scene was part of the res gestae and was a fact relevant and admissible to show that the accused drove with a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives and safety of others - Paragraphs 81 to 84.

Evidence - Topic 2290

Special modes of proof - Judicial notice - Particular matters - Effect of breathalyzer reading - Effect of alcohol on human body - The accused was charged with criminal negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle and had a breathalyzer reading of .12 - The Newfoundland District Court held that it would take judicial notice of the fact that a person with a blood-alcohol content reading of .12 was impaired in his ability to drive - Paragraphs 69 and 72 to 75.

Evidence - Topic 4751

Witnesses - Examination - Prior inconsistent statement - Effect of use of prior inconsistent statements - The Newfoundland District Court held that prior inconsistent statements may only be used to impeach witness' credibility and not to prove the truth of the statement itself - Paragraphs 23 to 24.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Francis and Barber (1929), 51 C.C.C. 343 (Sask. C.A.), appld. [para. 24].

R. v. Birch (1924), 18 Cr. App. R. 26, appld. [para. 24].

R. v. Harris (1927), 20 Cr. App. R. 144, appld. [para. 24].

R. v. Titchener, 131 C.C.C. 64, appld. [para. 58].

R. v. Louks, 119 C.C.C. 236 (N.S.), appld. [para. 59].

R. v. Belbeck, [1968] 2 C.C.C. 331, appld. [para. 60].

Mann v. The Queen, [1966] 2 C.C.C. 273, appld. [para. 60].

R. v. Fortin (1957), 121 C.C.C. 345, appld. [para. 62].

Stewart v. The Queen (1956), 117 C.C.C. 346, appld. [para. 62].

R. v. Ferguson, [1965] 1 C.C.C. 123, appld. [para. 70].

R. v. Oliver, 9 C.C.C.(2d) 526, appld. [para. 72].

R. v. Walker, 26 C.R.N.S. 268, appld. [para. 74].

R. v. Pisler, 20 C.R.N.S. 116, appld. [para. 76].

Balcerczyk v. The Queen, 117 C.C.C. 71, appld. [para. 82].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 202 [para. 3]; sect. 203 [para. 2]; sect. 233(4) [para. 54].

Counsel:

J. Barry Hill, for the Crown;

Mike Laurie, for White.

This case was heard before STEELE, D.C.J., of the Newfoundland District Court of the Judicial District of St. John's East. On December 18, 1975, STEELE, D.C.J., delivered the following judgment: