The appellant was charged with multiple counts of first degree murder.
At trial, the Crown argued he was the sole perpetrator, while the defence suggested others were involved.
The trial judge initially instructed the jury that they must acquit if they had a reasonable doubt the appellant was the actual shooter.
Following a jury question, the judge amended the instruction to include liability if the appellant was 'otherwise an active participant'.
The appellant was convicted of second degree murder and appealed, arguing the amended instruction undermined trial fairness.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the instructions adequately conveyed the alternate routes to liability and no miscarriage of justice occurred.
