R. v. D.J.W., 2012 SCC 63, [2012] 3 SCR 396

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Between:

D.J.W.

Appellant

and

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

Coram: LeBel, Fish, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ.

R. v. D.J.W., 2012 SCC 63, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 396

D.J.W.                                                                                                               Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                               Respondent

Indexed as:  R. v. D.J.W.

2012 SCC 63

File No.:  34623.

2012:  November 16.

Present:  LeBel, Fish, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia

            Criminal law — Aggravated assault — Assault with a weapon — Elements of offence — Accused attempting to circumcise four-year old son — Accused convicted by trial judge of criminal negligence causing bodily harm, but acquitted of aggravated assault and of lesser included offence of assault with a weapon — Court of Appeal entering convictions for aggravated assault and assault with a weapon and entering a stay of conviction for criminal negligence causing bodily harm — All elements of charges against accused had been established.

                    APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (Finch C.J. and Kirkpatrick and Hinkson JJ.A.), 2011 BCCA 522, 314 B.C.A.C. 209, 534 W.A.C. 209, 282 C.C.C. (3d) 352, [2011] B.C.J. No. 2463 (QL), 2011 CarswellBC 3547, setting aside the accused’s acquittal on charges of aggravated assault and assault using a weapon, entering convictions on those charges and entering a stay of the accused’s conviction for criminal negligence causing bodily harm. Appeal dismissed.

                    Douglas H. Christie, for the appellant.

                    Margaret A. Mereigh, for the respondent.

                    The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

[1]                              LeBel J. — We all agree with Hinkson J.A., writing for a unanimous Court of Appeal, that all the elements of the charges against the appellant had been established. We will not comment on whether the charge of assault with a weapon should have been stayed, as this issue was not raised in this Court. Nor do we need, on the specific facts of this case, to rule definitively on whether a circumcision performed by a person without medical training can ever be considered reasonable and in the child’s best interest. For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

                    Judgment accordingly.

                    Solicitor for the appellant:  Douglas H. Christie, Victoria.

                    Solicitor for the respondent:  Attorney General of British Columbia, Vancouver.