S.T. Goudge

The appellant was convicted of first degree murder by a jury for the shooting death of his former common-law partner.

On appeal, he conceded liability for second degree murder but argued the trial judge erred in her jury instructions regarding the evidence of planning and deliberation.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge fairly reviewed the evidence and was not required to review every competing inference or all of the evidence.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Attorney General of Canada brought a motion to extend the suspension of a declaration of invalidity to September 30, 2014.

The extension was requested because legislation responding to the court's previous decision was still proceeding through parliament.

As the request was reasonable and consented to by all parties and the amicus curiae, the Court of Appeal granted the motion.

The appellant was convicted of second degree murder following a street fight in which the victim was fatally stabbed.

On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial judge's verdict was unreasonable due to reliance on unreliable eyewitness evidence identifying her as the person who brought the knife to the fight, and that the trial judge misapprehended exculpatory evidence by failing to consider other participants as the possible stabber.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge was alive to the frailties of eyewitness identification, his factual findings were amply supported by the evidence, and he did not misapprehend the evidence regarding alternate suspects.

The appellant was convicted of two counts of first degree murder following the shooting deaths of his estranged wife and her new partner.

The Crown's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including testimony from the appellant's girlfriend, hearsay statements from the deceased expressing fear of the appellant, and evidence of the appellant's controlling behaviour during the marriage.

On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge erred by failing to give a Vetrovec caution regarding his girlfriend's testimony and by admitting the hearsay and bad character evidence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's discretionary decisions regarding the jury instructions or the admissibility of the evidence.