Docket

35510

Eric Vokurka v. Her Majesty the Queen

(Newfoundland & Labrador) (Criminal) (As of Right)

Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.

Proceedings
Date Proceeding Filed By
(if applicable)
2014-04-02 Appeal closed
2014-04-02 Transcript received, 23 pages
2014-03-24 Formal judgment sent to the registrar of the court of appeal and all parties
2014-03-24 Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties
2014-03-21 Judgment on the appeal rendered, LeB Abe Ro Mo Ka, The appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador - Court of Appeal, Number 12/76, 2013 NLCA 51, dated August 5, 2013, was heard on March 21, 2014, and the Court on that day delivered the following judgment orally:

ABELLA J. — The critical issue at trial was whether Mr. Vokurka intentionally inflicted the victim’s injuries. The majority in the Court of Appeal found that the trial judge’s findings of fact, inferences drawn from those facts, and the finding of guilt were reasonable.

The dissenting judge was of the view that the trial judge erred in failing to adequately consider and explain why, in her view, the “equally plausible explanation” supporting the defence of accident was not accepted. We do not agree, and agree instead with the majority that the trial judge adequately explained why he rejected the possibility of accident and found that the charge was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial judge set out the evidence of the victim’s statements, a doctor’s expert evidence about the nature of the wound, and the victim’s reaction to being cut, all of which led him clearly to the view that there was no “equally plausible explanation” for the cutting. He reviewed the relevant evidence and set out his reasons for concluding beyond a reasonable doubt that the injuries were intentionally inflicted. His inferences were reasonably supported by the evidence. Like the majority in the Court of Appeal, we see no error on his approach. It was not open to the dissenting judge, with respect, to reweigh the evidence by substituting her own view of it. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Dismissed
2014-03-21 Hearing of the appeal, 2014-03-21, LeB Abe Ro Mo Ka
Judgment rendered
2014-03-21 Respondent's condensed book, (Book Form), Filed in Court Her Majesty the Queen
2014-03-17 Notice of appearance, (Letter Form), Keir O'Flaherty and Bob Buckingham will be appearing Eric Vokurka
2014-02-18 Notice of appearance, Iain R.W. Hollett will be appearing for the Appellant Her Majesty the Queen
2014-01-28 Correspondence received from, Keir O'Flaherty, re.: Will be Counsel for the Appellant - Notice of change of solicitors rec'd 2014-03-17 Eric Vokurka
2014-01-28 Appeal perfected for hearing
2014-01-27 Respondent's book of authorities, (Book Form), Completed on: 2014-01-27 Her Majesty the Queen
2014-01-27 Respondent's record, (Book Form), Completed on: 2014-01-27, (Electronic version filed on 2014-01-27) Her Majesty the Queen
2014-01-27 Respondent's factum, (Book Form), Completed on: 2014-01-27, (Electronic version filed on 2014-01-27) Her Majesty the Queen
2013-11-26 Notice of hearing sent to parties
2013-11-19 Appeal hearing scheduled, 2014-03-21
Judgment rendered
2013-11-18 Appellant's book of authorities, (Book Form), Completed on: 2013-11-18 Eric Vokurka
2013-11-18 Appellant's record, (Book Form), 2 volumes, Completed on: 2013-11-18 Eric Vokurka
2013-11-18 Appellant's factum, (Book Form), service missing (rec'd 2013-11-21), Completed on: 2013-11-21 Eric Vokurka
2013-10-15 Letter advising the parties of tentative hearing date and filing deadlines (Notice of appeal – As of right)
2013-09-03 Notice of appeal, CD request (rec'd 2013-10-17), Completed on: 2013-11-04 Eric Vokurka
 

loading