Paquette v. The Queen

Paquette v. The Queen
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1979-05-23
Report
[1979] 2 SCR 26
Judges
Laskin, Bora; Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; Pratte, Yves; McIntyre, William Rogers
On appeal from
Alberta
Subjects
Criminal law
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Paquette v. The Queen, [1979] 2 S.C.R. 26
Date: 1979-05-23
Peter Ambrose Paquette Appellant;
and
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent.
1979: May 23.
Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey, Pratte and McIntyre JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALBERTA, APPELLATE DIVISION
Trial—Charge of murder—Jury requesting copy of judge’s comments relating to first degree murder, second degree murder and its relationship to self-defence—Jury entitled to have question answered and dealt with in open Court—Requirement that accused be present—Criminal Code, s. 577.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division (September 13, 1978, Action No. 12173), dismissing the appellant’s appeal from his conviction by a judge and jury on a charge of murder. Appeal allowed.
B.M. Barker, for the appellant.
L.J. Wenden, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We do not need to hear you in reply, Mr. Barker. We are all of the opinion that this appeal should be allowed, the judgment of the Alberta Appellate Division and the conviction set aside and a new trial ordered for second degree murder. The jury was entitled to have its question answered and dealt with in open Court and the accused had to be present. There is nothing in Meunier v. The Queen[1] which militates against the conclusions reached in this case.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Burke M. Barker, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: L.J. Wenden, Edmonton.
[1] (1965), 48 C.R. 14, aff’d [1966] S.C.R. 399.