B. Smart

The accused was charged with manslaughter after a neighbourly dispute escalated.

The accused went to the deceased's garage to discuss an altercation that occurred the previous day between their wives.

The deceased became angry, threatened to kill the accused, and reached for what appeared to be a handgun (later determined to be a pellet gun).

In response, the accused punched the deceased once in the head, causing a rare vertebral artery tear that resulted in death.

The court found that the accused acted in lawful self-defence under section 34 of the Criminal Code, as he reasonably believed force was being threatened and his response was proportionate.

The accused was found not guilty.

The offender was convicted of first degree murder and kidnapping with a firearm in relation to a drug debt.

The court imposed the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without parole eligibility for 25 years for the murder.

For the kidnapping, the court agreed with the Crown that the context of enforcing a drug debt required denunciation and deterrence, imposing a concurrent life sentence.

The Crown appealed the respondent's acquittal on a charge of operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg.

The trial judge had excluded the breathalyzer readings under s. 24(2) of the Charter after finding a breach of the respondent's s. 10(b) right to counsel, as police failed to provide him with a lawyer's directory when he could not reach his counsel of choice.

The Superior Court of Justice found no error in the trial judge's application of the law or the Grant framework and dismissed the appeal.

The Crown appealed the sentence of the respondent, who pleaded guilty to four drinking and driving offences.

The sentencing judge had declined to treat the respondent's 1985 impaired driving conviction as a previous conviction under s. 255(4) of the Criminal Code, and sentenced him to time served.

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court allowed the appeal, finding that the 1985 conviction was a previous conviction by virtue of the Interpretation Act, triggering the mandatory minimum sentence of 120 days.

The court varied the sentence to 6 months in custody, 3 years' probation, and a 5-year driving prohibition.

The appellants appealed a small claims court decision dismissing their claim for damages arising from their detention and search by police officers.

The officers were investigating a break and enter and detained the appellants as they walked past the scene.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge committed a palpable and overriding error in concluding there were reasonable grounds for investigative detention.

The court also found the appellants were de facto arrested, not merely detained.

However, the court upheld the finding that the search for weapons was reasonable.

The appellants were each awarded $500 in damages for false arrest and imprisonment.