R. v. Young (J.A.), (2006) 300 N.B.R.(2d) 154 (TD)

• Judge: Glennie, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: May 24, 2006
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2006), 300 N.B.R.(2d) 154 (TD);2006 NBQB 241

R. v. Young (J.A.) (2006), 300 N.B.R.(2d) 154 (TD);

    300 R.N.-B.(2e) 154; 782 A.P.R. 154

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[English language version only]

[Version en langue anglaise seulement]

Temp. Cite: [2006] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.050

Renvoi temp.: [2006] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.050

Her Majesty the Queen v. Angus Jason Blizzard, John Adam Young, Shane Timothy Voeller and Dwayne Noel Ireland

(S/CR/20/03; 2006 NBQB 241; 2006 NBBR 241)

Indexed As: R. v. Young (J.A.)

Répertorié: R. v. Young (J.A.)

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Saint John

Glennie, J.

June 5, 2006.

Summary:

Résumé:

Young and three others were charged with unlawful conspiracy to traffic in a controlled substance, to wit, marijuana. The three other accused were found guilty after signing an admission of fact and inviting the court to find them guilty.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, found Young guilty.

Criminal Law - Topic 2647

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Conspiracies - Elements of offence - The accused John Young acknowledged that there was a conspiracy to traffic marijuana between June 22 and September 8, 2003 - Discussions involving several participants took place in a hotel room on June 26 and 27, 2003 - Young was present on both days - Discussion subjects included the number of plants, price, other drugs, etc. - On the June 27 meeting, Young openly discussed drugs with a participant charged with murder and extortion - Young was also seen chauffeuring one of the participants - He frequently visited the house where the money was kept - Intercepted conversations made mention of "John" - Young was one particular participant's helper, transporter of money and muscle - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, found that there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Young was a member of the above conspiracy, that he agreed to participate in it and perform specific acts indicating his participation - The court found Young guilty of unlawfully conspiring to traffic in marijuana - See paragraphs 21 to 60.

Criminal Law - Topic 2680

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Conspiracies - Evidence - General - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, discussed proof of conspiracy by overt acts - The court stated: "The overt acts may have no value taken by themselves. It is only in looking at the total picture that one can arrive at the conclusion as to whether or not there was an agreement. It is necessary to look at the cumulative effect which can raise the presumption of concert and design from which a conspiracy may be inferred ... It is accordingly necessary to look at all the events as a whole and drawing reasonable inferences from that entire evidence" - See paragraphs 16 to 20.

Criminal Law - Topic 2682

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Conspiracies - Conspirator's exception to the hearsay rule - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, discussed the co-conspirators' exception to the hearsay rule - See paragraphs 4 to 10.

Droit criminel - Cote 2647

Tentatives, complots, complices et participants - Complots - Éléments de l'infraction - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 2647 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 2680

Tentatives, complots, complices et participants - Complots - Preuve - Généralités - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 2680 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 2682

Tentatives, complots, complices et participants - Complots - Exception à la règle du ouï-dire à l'égard du conspirateur - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 2682 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Mapara (S.) et al. (2005), 332 N.R. 244; 211 B.C.A.C. 1; 349 W.A.C. 1; 2005 SCC 23, consd. [para. 4].

R. v. Carter, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 938; 47 N.R. 288; 46 N.B.R.(2d) 142; 121 A.P.R. 142, consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Gray (R.) (1998), 207 N.B.R.(2d) 69; 529 A.P.R. 69 (C.A.), consd. [para. 10].

R. v. Baron and Wertman (1976), 31 C.C.C.(2d) 525 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 19].

R. v. Canadian Dredge & Dock Co., Marine Industries Ltd., Porter (J.P.) Co. and Richelieu Dredging Corp. (1981), 56 C.C.C.(2d) 193 (Ont. C.A.), affd. [1985] 1 S.C.R. 662; 59 N.R. 241; 9 O.A.C. 321; 45 C.R.(3d) 289; 19 C.C.C.(3d) 1, consd. [para. 23].

R. v. McNamara - see R. v. Canadian Dredge & Dock Co., Marine Industries Ltd., Porter (J.P.) Co. and Richelieu Dredging Corp.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Martin's Annual Criminal Code (2006), p. 784 [para. 14].

McWilliams, Peter K., Canadian Criminal Evidence (4th Ed. 2003), paras. 22:10110 [para. 15]; 22.10300 [para. 22]; 22:10500 [para. 16].

Counsel:

Gerald H. McCracken, Q.C., and Roland V. Levesque, on behalf of the Crown;

William H. Watts, on behalf of John Adam Young.

Glennie, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Saint John, heard this case on May 15 to 19 and May 24, 2006, and delivered the following decision orally on June 5, 2006.