The accused was convicted of second degree murder after shooting a criminal accomplice in the back of the head.
He claimed self-defence, testifying that he believed the victim and another accomplice were planning to kill him.
The trial judge left the defence to the jury but made errors in the charge.
The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Crown's appeal and restored the conviction, holding that the defence of self-defence lacked an 'air of reality' because there was no evidence upon which a reasonable jury could conclude that the accused reasonably believed he had no alternative but to kill the victim.
Therefore, the defence should not have been left to the jury, and the errors in the charge were harmless.
