R. v. Wiens (K.G.), 2016 BCCA 34

• Judge: Frankel, D. Smith and Savage, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: January 26, 2016
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: 2016 BCCA 34;(2016), 382 B.C.A.C. 107 (CA)

R. v. Wiens (K.G.) (2016), 382 B.C.A.C. 107 (CA);

    660 W.A.C. 107

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JA.057

Regina (respondent) v. Keith Gregory Wiens (appellant)

(CA41140; 2016 BCCA 34)

Indexed As: R. v. Wiens (K.G.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Frankel, D. Smith and Savage, JJ.A.

January 26, 2016.

Summary:

The accused shot his common law spouse in the head. A jury found him guilty of second degree murder. The accused had argued that he shot her in self-defence, as she came at him with a knife. Police found a knife in the deceased spouse's hand. The Crown argued that the knife was "planted" after the accused shot her. The trial judge permitted evidence from the spouse's three ex-husbands that the spouse had never acted violently or aggressively. The accused appealed his conviction on the grounds that the trial judge erred in: (1) admitting evidence of the spouse's "peaceful disposition"; (2) inadequately instructing the jury respecting that evidence; and (3) refusing to permit him to call expert evidence that when he, as a retired R.C.M.P. officer, shot his spouse he was acting in a manner consistent with his training as a police officer.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The "peaceful disposition" evidence was admissible where it was relevant in the case of self-defence and the accused painted the spouse as the aggressor. The probative value of the evidence outweighed its prejudicial effect.

Criminal Law - Topic 4377.2

Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding character of victim - See paragraphs 42 to 54.

Criminal Law - Topic 5209

Evidence and witnesses - Admissibility and relevancy - Prejudicial evidence - See paragraphs 55 to 68.

Criminal Law - Topic 5528

Evidence and witnesses - Testimony respecting the victim - Character of victim - See paragraphs 29 to 41.

Evidence - Topic 1026

Relevant facts - Relevance and materiality - Admissibility - Prejudicial evidence - See paragraphs 55 to 68.

Evidence - Topic 7000.4

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Admissibility - General - See paragraphs 55 to 68.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Dejong (J.M.) (1998), 108 B.C.A.C. 126; 176 W.A.C. 126; 125 C.C.C.(3d) 302 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Diu (A.B.) et al. (2000), 133 O.A.C. 201; 144 C.C.C.(3d) 481 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Krasniqi (A.) (2012), 295 O.A.C. 223; 2012 ONCA 561, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Chahley (N.W.) (1992), 13 B.C.A.C. 213; 24 W.A.C. 213; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Watson (K.S.) (1996), 92 O.A.C. 131; 108 C.C.C.(3d) 310 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Oseguera (L.O.B.) (2014), 361 B.C.A.C. 116; 619 W.A.C. 116; 315 C.C.C.(3d) 542; 2014 BCCA 352, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. McCotter (W.J.) (2012), 315 B.C.A.C. 290; 535 W.A.C. 290; 287 C.C.C.(3d) 423; 2012 BCCA 54, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Handy (J.), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 908; 290 N.R. 1; 160 O.A.C. 201; 2002 SCC 56, refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Last (G.E.), [2009] 3 S.C.R. 146; 394 N.R. 78; 255 O.A.C. 334; 2009 SCC 45, refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Jacquard (C.O.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 314; 207 N.R. 246; 157 N.S.R.(2d) 161; 462 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Rodgerson (J.), [2015] 2 S.C.R. 760; 473 N.R. 1; 334 O.A.C. 1; 2015 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Daley - see R. v. W.J.D.

R. v. W.J.D., [2007] 3 S.C.R. 523; 369 N.R. 225; 302 Sask.R. 4; 411 W.A.C. 4; 2007 SCC 53, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Alexander (J.A.N.) (2015), 380 B.C.A.C. 35; 655 W.A.C. 35; 2015 BCCA 484, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. MacKinnon (T.N.) et al. (1999), 117 O.A.C. 258; 132 C.C.C.(3d) 545 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 9; 166 N.R. 245; 71 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 60].

R. v. Pearce (M.L.) (2014), 310 Man.R.(2d) 14; 618 W.A.C. 14; 318 C.C.C.(3d) 372; 2014 MBCA 70, refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. F.Y.K.O. (2015), 368 B.C.A.C. 157; 633 W.A.C. 157; 18 C.R.(7th) 158; 2015 BCCA 88, refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Orr - see R. v. F.Y.K.O.

R. v. Seaboyer and Gayme, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577; 128 N.R. 81; 48 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Grant (M.E.), [2015] 1 S.C.R. 475; 468 N.R. 83; 315 Man.R.(2d) 259; 630 W.A.C. 259; 17 C.R.(7th) 229; 2015 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Bell (1997), 115 C.C.C.(3d) 107 (N.W.T.C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Doodnaught (G.), [2013] O.T.C. Uned. 4534; 2013 ONSC 4534, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Al-Rassi (A.) (2013), 331 N.S.R.(2d) 328; 1051 A.P.R. 328; 2013 NSSC 211, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. B.M. (1998), 115 O.A.C. 117; 130 C.C.C.(3d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Counsel:

R.S. Fowler, Q.C., and E. Purtzki, for the appellant;

M.T. Ainslie, Q.C., and T.A. Livingston, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 6, 2015, at Kelowna, B.C., before Frankel, D. Smith and Savage, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

On January 26, 2016, Frankel, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.