Bell v. The Queen, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 594
David Andrew Bell, Randy George Blake, Brian James Dempsey, John Edward Beatteay, Robert Vincent Caruso and Richard Neil Gillespie Appellants;
and
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent.
File No.: 17037.
1985: March 5, 6; 1985: May 23.
Present: Dickson C.J. and Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson, Le Dain and La Forest JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario
Criminal law ‑‑ Courts ‑‑ Election -- Jurisdiction -- Accused consenting to be tried by a “court composed of a judge who is not a judge of a superior court of criminal jurisdiction” -- Crown able to choose trial before county or district court judge and jury or a supreme court judge and jury -- Criminal Code , s. 429.1.
Criminal law -- Evidence -- Similar fact evidence admissible -- Charge to jury on similar fact evidence acceptable.
Statutes and Regulations Cited
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 429.1 [rep. & sub. 1974-75-76 (Can.), c. 93, s. 38].
APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal rendered March 22, 1982, dismissing appellants’ appeal from their convictions (1979), 50 C.C.C. (2d) 400, 10 C.R. (3d) 345. Appeal dismissed.
Clayton C. Ruby and Melvyn Green, for the appellants Bell and Blake.
Ronald R. Price, Q.C., for the appellant Dempsey.
Alan D. Gold, for the appellants Beatteay, Caruso and Gillespie.
Brian J. Gover, for the respondent.
The following is the judgment delivered by
1. The Court–Two points were raised on this appeal.
2. On the first point, we all agreed that the trial judge and the Court of Appeal of Ontario were correct in holding that where an accused consents under s. 429.1 of the Criminal Code to be tried by a “court composed of a judge who is not a judge of the superior court of criminal jurisdiction”, the Attorney General or his agent may choose to have him tried either before a county or district court judge and a jury or before a supreme court judge and a jury.
3. On the second point, we agree with the Court of Appeal that the trial judge made no error in admitting similar fact evidence in this case and that his charge on this matter was acceptable.
4. The appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Solicitors for the appellants Bell and Blake: Clayton C. Ruby and Melvyn Green, Toronto.
Solicitor for the appellant Dempsey: Ronald R. Price, Kingston.
Solicitor for the appellants Beatteay, Caruso and Gillespie: Alan D. Gold, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, Toronto.
Email this Content