R. v. Cole, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 904

Ronald Robert Cole Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Indexed as: R. v. Cole

File No.: 21542.

1991: May 1.

Present: L'Heureux‑Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Stevenson JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia

Criminal law ‑‑ Allegation that trial judge not impartial ‑‑ Trial judge asking questions of appellant ‑‑ A properly instructed jury acting judicially could have convicted ‑‑ Section 686(1)(a)(i) properly applied by Court of Appeal ‑‑ Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, s. 686(1)(a)(i).

Statutes and Regulations Cited

Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, s. 686(1)(a)(i).

APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissing an appeal from conviction by Selbie Co. Ct. J. Appeal dismissed.

Barry L. Long, for the appellant.

Elizabeth Bennett, for the respondent.

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

L'Heureux‑Dubé J. ‑‑ This case comes to us as of right on a dissent on a point of law in the Court of Appeal.

Given the function of a Court of Appeal under s. 686(1)(a)(i), Criminal Code, we are all of the view that the majority of the Court of Appeal made no error and, reviewing the whole of the evidence anew, that the evidence is one upon which a properly instructed jury, acting judicially, could reasonably have entered a conviction.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellant: Bellamy & Long, Vancouver.

Solicitor for the respondent: The Ministry of the Attorney General, Vancouver.