B.C.S.C.: summary conviction appeal allowed; verdict
of acquittal entered.
He seeks to have his conviction set aside and a verdict
of acquittal entered on the basis that the search was unconstitutional.
Not exact matches
The Saskatchewan Court
of Appeal allowed the appeal and
entered an
acquittal.
Having regard to the highly unusual circumstances
of this Reference, we have determined that the most appropriate remedy is to
enter an
acquittal.
On reconsideration and after having spoken to a an expert or two, I've concluded that all the panel meant by para 787 is that (1) there were two valid choices that could be made on the evidence: guilty or not guilty; (2) the panel thought that the more probable result at any trial would be not guilty; and (3) in the circumstances, since the ONLY routes open to the panel in light
of the miscarriage finding was a new trial or the entry
of an
acquittal and since a new trial was inappropriate etc in the circumstances the correct procedure was to
enter the
acquittal.
A B.C. man convicted
of drug and firearms offences based on seizure
of evidence during a warrantless entry into his apartment has had his appeal to the Supreme Court
of Canada allowed, his convictions set aside and
acquittals entered.
Accordingly, in the words
of s. 696.3 (3)(ii)
of the Criminal Code, the appeal is allowed, the conviction for murder is set aside and an
acquittal entered.
The Ontario Court
of Appeal accepted this argument and the Appellant's convictions for Assault and Assault with a Weapon were overturned and an
acquittal entered.
The Court
of Appeal overturned the conviction and
entered an
acquittal.
-- break and
enter: John Doe, [2007] B.C.J. B.C.J. No. 2111, 228 C.C.C. (3d) 302 (B.C.C.A.),
acquittal set aside, new trial ordered; accused testified that he had been fasting in the woods for 60 days when he
entered the house to be warm and to eat; the trial judge erred by not correctly applying the modified objective test to the first two components
of the defence
of necessity — the existence
of an imminent peril or danger and the absence
of any reasonable legal alternative, had to be assessed on a modified objective standard; the trial judge erred by failing to determine whether the accused's perception
of his situation, and the absence
of any lawful alternatives, had an objectively reasonable foundation; the verdict would not necessarily have been the same had the trial judge properly applied the law on the defence
of necessity.
In 2011 — 15 years after Brant pleaded guilty — the Ontario Court
of Appeal found that a miscarriage
of justice had occurred and
entered an
acquittal.
The decision to
enter a stay
of proceedings, or to obtain an acquittal by adducing no evidence, was the subject of consideration by former Chief Justice Antonio Lamer in The Lamer Commission Of Inquiry Pertaining To The Cases Of: Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken (2006
of proceedings, or to obtain an
acquittal by adducing no evidence, was the subject
of consideration by former Chief Justice Antonio Lamer in The Lamer Commission Of Inquiry Pertaining To The Cases Of: Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken (2006
of consideration by former Chief Justice Antonio Lamer in The Lamer Commission
Of Inquiry Pertaining To The Cases Of: Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken (2006
Of Inquiry Pertaining To The Cases
Of: Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken (2006
Of: Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken (2006).
The trial judge rejected this argument, but was overruled by the Court
of Appeal, which excluded the Crown's evidence and
entered an
acquittal.
The Manitoba Court
of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and
entered an
acquittal.
Winmill can not be distinguished from this case on the basis that the charges in this case are different, or that the prosecution
of the appellant ended with his
entering into a peace bond rather than an
acquittal.