Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

CASE NO.                                                  VOLUME                                                          PAGE

 

H. (N.M.), a young offender                                                           HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                         - and -

(Appellant)                                                                                                                  (Respondent)

 

C.A.C.  No.  160162                                Halifax, N.S.                                         Glube, C.J.N.S.

                                                                                                                               (orally)

                                            [Cite as R. v. N.M.H., 2000 NSCA 109]

 

 

APPEAL HEARD:                                        October 3, 2000

 

JUDGMENT DELIVERED:              October 3, 2000                   

 

WRITTEN RELEASE OF ORAL:                October 5, 2000

 

 

 

SUBJECT:           APPEAL OF CONVICTION

 

SUMMARY:         N.M.H. convicted as a party of robbery with violence.  She gave information to two youths who on that basis committed a home robbery.  Although they anticipated finding a large sum of money, less than $100.00 was found, which they did not split with N.M.H.  The two youths plead guilty and testified against N.M.H.

 

ISSUE:                 Was the verdict unreasonable.  Was there a miscarriage of justice.

 

RESULT:  After making findings of credibility of facts, the trial judge does not have to address and resolve each and every inconsistency in the evidence of the two youths.  (See:  R. v. Burns (1994), 89 C.C.C. (3d) 193.)

 

Verdict not unreasonable and no miscarriage of justice.

 

Appeal dismissed.

 

 

 

This information sheet does not form part of the Court's judgment.  Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet.  The full court judgment consists of 6 pages.

 

 

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.