SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Citation : R. v. Eastgaard, 2012 SCC 11, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 393 |
Date : 20120319 Docket : 34337 |
Between:
Hans Jason Eastgaard
Appellant
and
Her Majesty The Queen
Respondent
Coram : McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ.
Reasons for Judgment : (para. 1)
|
McLachlin C.J. (LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ concurring)
|
R. v. Eastgaard, 2012 SCC 11, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 393
Hans Jason Eastgaard Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Eastgaard
2012 SCC 11
File No.: 34337.
2012: March 19.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta
Criminal law — Firearms — Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition — Elements of offence — Mens rea — Trial judge inferring from circumstances of case that accused had knowledge that firearm was loaded — Conviction based on inference drawn from circumstantial evidence not unreasonable — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 95.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (Ritter and Bielby JJ.A. and Phillips J. (ad hoc)), 2011 ABCA 152, 50 Alta. L.R. (5th) 196, 510 A.R. 117, 276 C.C.C. (3d) 432, 527 W.A.C. 117, [2011] A.J. No. 591 (QL), 2011 CarswellAlta 886, affirming a conviction entered by Hawco J., 2009 CarswellAlta 2348. Appeal dismissed.
Jennifer Ruttan and Michael Bates, for the appellant.
Goran Tomljanovic, Q.C., for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
[1] The Chief Justice — Despite the very complete and able argument of counsel for the appellant, we agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the verdict was not unreasonable. The appeal accordingly is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Ruttan Bates, Calgary.
Solicitor for the respondent: Attorney General of Alberta, Calgary.