R. v. Hare, 1989 CanLII 51 (SCC), [1989] 2 SCR 1065
John Gordon Hare, Robert Thomas Dyer
Geraldine McCreight, Margaret McCreight Appellants
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Hare
1989: November 2.
Present: Lamer, Wilson, La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario
Criminal law ‑‑ Directed verdict ‑‑ Manslaughter ‑‑ Whether trial judge erred in directing a verdict of acquittal.
Cases Cited
Applied: United States of America v. Shephard, 1976 CanLII 8 (SCC), [1977] 2 S.C.R. 1067; Mezzo v. The Queen, 1986 CanLII 16 (SCC), [1986] 1 S.C.R. 802; R. v. Monteleone, 1987 CanLII 16 (SCC), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 154.
APPEALS from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal1, allowing the Crown's appeal from the appellants' acquittal on charges of manslaughter. Appeals dismissed.
Christopher Hicks, for the appellant Hare.
David Harris, for the appellant Dyer.
Keith E. Wright, for the appellant Geraldine McCreight.
M. Block, for the appellant Margaret McCreight.
W. J. Blacklock, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Lamer J. ‑‑ We are all of the view that under the rules set down in Shephard, Mezzo and, more recently, Monteleone, the Court of Appeal did not err in the particular circumstances of the case in ordering a new trial. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant Hare: Christopher Hicks, Toronto.
Solicitors for the appellant Dyer: Carter, McCombs and Minden, Toronto.
Solicitor for the appellant Geraldine McCreight: Keith E. Wright, Toronto.
Solicitors for the appellant Margaret McCreight: Stephen Price & Associates, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Ministry of the Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.