SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Between:
Claude Beaulieu
Appellant
and
Her Majesty The Queen
Respondent
Official English Translation
Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
| Reasons for judgment: (para. 1) |
|
LeBel J. (McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ. concurring) |
______________________________
R. v. Beaulieu, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 3, 2008 SCC 1
Claude Beaulieu Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Beaulieu
Neutral citation: 2008 SCC 1.
File No.: 32004.
2008: January 24.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec
Criminal law — Evidence — Fresh evidence — Whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing motion to adduce fresh evidence.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal (Chamberland, Forget and Thibault JJ.A.), [2007] R.J.Q. 561, 49 C.R. (6th) 365, [2007] Q.J. No. 2115 (QL), 2007 CarswellQue 2056, 2007 QCCA 402, upholding the accused’s convictions entered by Corbeil-Laramée J.C.Q. Appeal dismissed.
Christian Deslauriers, for the appellant.
Lori Renée Weitzman and Mileyne Grégoire, for the respondent.
English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by
[1] LeBel J. _ We all agree that the motion to adduce fresh evidence does not meet the criteria developed by the courts and that the majority of the Quebec Court of Appeal was right to dismiss it. We also believe that the appellant has not established a basis for this Court to intervene. In particular, it has not been shown that the guilty verdict is unreasonable or that there has been a miscarriage of justice. For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Deslauriers & Lafleur, Ottawa.
Solicitor for the respondent: Poursuites criminelles et pénales du Québec, Montréal.
Email this Content