The appellant was convicted of second degree murder based on circumstantial evidence.
He appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial judge's pre-Lifchus jury charge on reasonable doubt, which included references to 'moral certainty', was flawed.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge's instructions were in substantial compliance with the principles set out in Lifchus and did not give rise to a reasonable likelihood that the jury misapprehended the correct standard of proof.
