R. v. Blacklaws

R. v. Blacklaws
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
2013-02-15
Neutral citation
2013 SCC 8
Report
[2013] 1 SCR 403
Case number
34889
Judges
McLachlin, Beverley; Fish, Morris J.; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Rothstein, Marshall; Moldaver, Michael J.
On appeal from
British Columbia
Subjects
Criminal law
Notes
SCC Case Information: 34889
Decision Content
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Citation: R. v. Blacklaws, 2013 SCC 8, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 403
Date: 20130215
Docket: 34889
Between:
Her Majesty The Queen
Appellant
and
Fredrick Owen Blacklaws
Respondent
Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Fish, Abella, Rothstein and Moldaver JJ.
Reasons for Judgment:
(para. 1)
McLachlin C.J. (Fish, Abella, Rothstein and Moldaver JJ. concurring)
R. v. Blacklaws, 2013 SCC 8, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 403
Her Majesty The Queen Appellant
v.
Fredrick Owen Blacklaws Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Blacklaws
2013 SCC 8
File No.: 34889.
2013: February 15.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Fish, Abella, Rothstein and Moldaver JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia
Criminal law — Procedure — Application to sever counts — Charges arising from two separate incidents involving different complainants — Crown charging the counts relating to both incidents on same indictment — Trial judge dismissing application to sever counts — Majority of Court of Appeal ordering new trial on basis that denial of severance resulted in injustice — Trial judge did not act unjudicially in denying severance application — Denial of severance application not resulting in injustice.
APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (Finch, Newbury and Levine JJ.A.), 2012 BCCA 217, 260 C.R.R. (2d) 351, 93 C.R. (6th) 83, 285 C.C.C. (3d) 132, 322 B.C.A.C. 107, 549 W.A.C. 107, [2012] B.C.J. No. 980, 2012 CarswellBC 1457, setting aside the accused’s convictions for forcible confinement, overcoming resistance to commission of an offence, sexual assault causing bodily harm and assault causing bodily harm, and ordering a new trial. Appeal allowed.
Susan J. Brown, for the appellant.
Brent R. Anderson and Lawrence D. Myers, Q.C., for the respondent.
The following is the judgment delivered orally by
[1] The Chief Justice — We are all of the view that the appeal should be allowed, for the reasons of Chief Justice Finch.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Attorney General of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Solicitors for the respondent: Myers, McMurdo & Karp, Vancouver.