SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Appeals heard: March 22, 2016 Judgment rendered: March 22, 2016 Dockets: 36612, 36613

Between

Alan Peter Knapczyk

Appellant

and

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

And Between

John Reginald Alcantara

Appellant

and

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté and Brown JJ.

Reasons for Judgment: (paras. 1 to 2)

McLachlin C.J. (Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté and Brown JJ. concurring)

R. v. Knapczyk, 2016 SCC 10, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 78

Alan Peter Knapczyk Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

• and -

John Reginald Alcantara Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Indexed as: R. v. Knapczyk

2016 SCC 10

File Nos.: 36612, 36613.

2016: March 22.

Present: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté and Brown JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta

Criminal law — Controlled drugs and substances — Trafficking — Parties to offence — Aiding and abetting — Accused provided protection to cocaine distribution business — Court of Appeal properly holding that accused aided and abetted offence of trafficking through distribution — Accused’s convictions for trafficking in cocaine upheld.

APPEALS from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (Côté, Costigan and Wakeling JJ.A.), 2015 ABCA 258 , 326 C.C.C. (3d) 377, 22 Alta. L.R. (6th) 77, 602 A.R. 197, 647 W.A.C. 197, [2015] 12 W.W.R. 649, [2015] A.J. No. 882 (QL), 2015 CarswellAlta 1475 (WL Can.), setting aside the acquittals for trafficking in cocaine entered by Greckol J., 2012 ABQB 521 , 547 A.R. 1, 80 Alta. L.R. (5th) 1, [2013] 6 W.W.R. 1, [2012] A.J. No. 929 (QL), 2012 CarswellAlta 1524 (WL Can.), and entering convictions. Appeals dismissed.

Simon Renouf , Q.C. , for the appellant Alan Peter Knapczyk .

A. Clayton Rice and Heather Ferg , for the appellant John Reginald Alcantara.

Ronald C. Reimer and Jonathan Martin , for the respondent.

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

[ 1 ] The Chief Justice — We are agreed that the appeals should be dismissed. We agree with the following statement of the Court of Appeal:

On the correct application of the legal principles to the facts found by the trial judge, it is an inescapable conclusion that the respondents aided and abetted the offence of trafficking through distribution. Their acts prevented or hindered interference with the accomplishment of a criminal act. In this way, the respondents provided assistance and encouragement to Mr. Caines in the commission of the offence of trafficking. There is a clear link between the respondents’ acts and the commission of the offence. [para. 15]

[ 2 ] The appeals are dismissed and the order of the Court of Appeal affirmed.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellant Alan Peter Knapczyk: Simon Renouf Professional Corporation, Edmonton.

Solicitors for the appellant John Reginald Alcantara: Evans Fagan Rice McKay, Calgary.

Solicitor for the respondent: Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Edmonton.