SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Appeal Heard: February 19, 2025 Judgment Rendered: February 19, 2025 Docket: 41320
Between: Roger Patrick Bilodeau Appellant and His Majesty The King Respondent - and - Attorney General of Ontario Intervener Coram: Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Jamal and O'Bonsawin JJ.
Unanimous Judgment Read By: (para. 1)
Wagner C.J.
Note: This document is subject to editorial revision before its reproduction in final form in the Canada Supreme Court Reports.
Roger Patrick Bilodeau Appellant
v.
His Majesty The King Respondent
and
Attorney General of Ontario Intervener
Indexed as: R. v. Bilodeau
2025 SCC 2
2025: February 19.
Present: Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Jamal and O'Bonsawin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal of alberta
Criminal law — Charge to jury — Party liability — Common unlawful purpose — Accused involved in car chase with two men — Accused asking adult son to come help and bring gun — Chase turning into confrontation and culminating in son fatally shooting both men — Son convicted of second degree murder and manslaughter — Accused convicted by jury of manslaughter as party to son's offences for having formed intention in common with son to carry out unlawful purpose of possession of weapon for dangerous purpose and committing assault — Accused appealing conviction on basis that trial judge erred in law in charge to jury by providing insufficient direction as to elements of offences said to be common unlawful purpose, misdirecting jury in relation to accused's potential party liability, and instructing jury on co-conspirators' exception to hearsay rule — Court of Appeal holding that trial judge's instructions to jury contained no prejudicial error — Convictions upheld.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (Slatter, Pentelechuk and Antonio JJ.A.), 2024 ABCA 148, 70 Alta. L.R. (7th) 180, 437 C.C.C. (3d) 475, [2024] 8 W.W.R. 48, [2024] A.J. No. 498 (Lexis), 2024 CarswellAlta 1100 (WL), affirming the convictions of the accused for manslaughter. Appeal dismissed.
Caitlin A. Dick, for the appellant.
Matthew Griener, for the respondent.
Samuel Greene, for the intervener.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
1The Chief Justice — We are all of the view that the appeal should be dismissed, substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (2024 ABCA 148, 70 Alta. L.R. (7th) 180). Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Deborah Hatch Law, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the intervener: Ministry of the Attorney General, Toronto.