Canada is fairly unusual in the common law world in permitting appeals from jury acquittals in criminal matters. A more common position is that an acquittal by a jury ends a matter.
That said, even though an appeal from an acquittal is possible it is difficult. The Court of Appeal today made that clear in R. v. Samuels, 2009 ONCA 614 saying:
1) The Vezeau standard
[19] Under s. 676(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, the Crown may appeal against a verdict of acquittal on a question of law alone. However, even if a trial judge commits a legal error in instructing a jury, the Crown bears a heavy onus to overturn an acquittal. Under the standard established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Vezeau v. The Queen (1977), 28 C.C.C. (2d) 81, at p. 87, "it was the duty of the Crown, in order to obtain a new trial, to satisfy the court that the verdict would not necessarily have been the same if the trial judge had properly directed the jury".
[20] Later decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada on the Vezeau standard reflect the underlying proposition that a verdict of acquittal is not lightly to be overturned. For example, in R. v. Morin, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 345, at p. 374, Sopinka J. for the majority emphasized that the Crown's onus is "a heavy one… [it] must satisfy the court with a reasonable degree of certainty". And in its recent decision in R. v. Graveline (2006), 207 C.C.C. (3d) 481, at para. 14, Fish J. for the majority wrote that for an accused who has been acquitted to be sent back for a new trial, the Crown must "satisfy the appellate court that the error (or errors) of the trial judge might reasonably be thought, in the concrete reality of the case at hand, to have had a material bearing on the acquittal".
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
No comments:
Post a Comment