SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Between:
Her Majesty The Queen
Appellant
and
T.L.M.
Respondent
Coram : Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis JJ.
| Reasons for Judgment : (paras. 1 to 2) |
Deschamps J. (Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis JJ. concurring) |
R. v. T.L.M., 2012 SCC 6, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 233
Her Majesty The Queen Appellant
v.
T.L.M. Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. T.L.M.
2012 SCC 6
File No.: 34288.
2012: February 14.
Present: Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for newfoundland and labrador
Criminal law — Evidence — Similar fact evidence — Admissibility of similar fact evidence relating to previous conviction of the accused for sexual assault — Trial judge did not err in admitting similar fact evidence.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal (Welsh, Rowe and Hoegg JJ.A.), 2011 NLCA 24, 307 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 262, 954 A.P.R. 262, 271 C.C.C. (3d) 148, 85 C.R. (6th) 170, [2011] N.J. No. 118 (QL), 2011 CarswellNfld 115, setting aside convictions entered by Adams J., 2010 NLTD 12, 294 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 308, 908 A.P.R. 308, [2009] N.J. No. 374 (QL), 2009 CarswellNfld 356. Appeal allowed.
Stephen R. Dawson, for the appellant.
Derek Hogan, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
[1] Deschamps J. — We agree with Hoegg J.A., dissenting at the Court of Appeal, that the trial judge committed no reviewable error. Therefore, the appeal is allowed.
[2] Having heard the parties, we also agree with the dissenting judge that count No. 1 should be stayed and that the convictions on the other counts should be restored.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s.
Solicitor for the respondent: Newfoundland and Labrador Legal Aid Commission, St. John’s.
Email this Content