The Crown appealed a judgment setting aside a murder conviction and substituting a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.
The Supreme Court held that the court below erred by treating the first branch of s. 16(2) of the Criminal Code as extending to moral wrongfulness and by invoking s. 7 of the Charter to re-interpret that branch contrary to existing authority.
However, applying the majority reasoning in Chaulk, the Court concluded the accused's delusional state rendered him incapable of knowing the act was morally wrong under the second branch of s. 16(2).
The appellate substitution of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity under s. 686(1)(d) was therefore upheld and the Crown's appeal was dismissed.
