Nola E. Garton

The accused brought a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal on a charge of first degree murder following the close of the Crown’s case.

The defence argued there was no evidence capable of establishing planning and deliberation, conceding only that evidence could support second degree murder.

Applying the directed verdict test from United States of America v. Sheppard and R. v. Arcuri, the court considered whether there was any evidence upon which a properly instructed jury could infer planning and deliberation.

The court held that circumstantial evidence including motive arising from a prior altercation and threat, potential retrieval of a knife shortly before the attack, absence of a contemporaneous struggle, and the nature of the fatal wound could support such an inference.

The motion was therefore dismissed and the first degree murder charge was left for the jury.

The accused applied under s. 591(3)(b) of the Criminal Code for severance of his trial from that of a co‑accused in a large wiretap drug‑trafficking prosecution.

He argued that waiting for the co‑accused’s Garofoli challenge to the wiretap authorizations would delay his trial and infringe his right to be tried within a reasonable time under s. 11(b) of the Charter.

The court reviewed the governing principles, including the presumption that alleged co‑conspirators should be tried jointly and the need to balance prejudice to the accused against the public interest in efficient proceedings.

Given the substantial evidentiary overlap, the complexity of the investigation, and the efficiency of a single trial, the accused failed to rebut the presumption favouring joint trials.