Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
33323
Jared Eugene Baker v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Alberta) (Criminal) (As of Right)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2010-04-06 | Transcript received, (22 pages) | |
| 2010-03-22 | Appeal closed | |
| 2010-03-22 | Formal judgment sent to the registrar of the court of appeal and all parties | |
| 2010-03-22 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties | |
| 2010-03-19 |
Judgment on the appeal rendered, LeB De F Abe Cha Ro Cro, The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton), Number 0703-0302-A, 2009 ABCA 252, dated August 20, 2009, was heard this day and the following judgment was rendered orally: LeBel J. — Despite the able submissions of Mr. Davison for the appellant, this appeal cannot succeed. This case is different from Molodowic (R. v. Molodowic, 2000 SCC 16, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 420), where there was uncontested evidence that the accused was incapable of knowing that his actions were morally wrong. Here, the jury was faced with conflicting expert evidence, with statements from the appellant suggesting, at some points, that he understood the moral blameworthiness of his conduct and with the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence that could be reasonably interpreted as evidence that he knew that his acts were morally wrong. The jury could make the determination of whether the appellant had made out his defence that he was suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of s. 16 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, on the basis of the whole of this evidence. Its finding that he had not was not unreasonable. The majority of the Court of Appeal was right when it held that the verdict ought not to be interfered with: 2009 ABCA 252, 246 C.C.C. (3d) 520. For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed. Dismissed |
|
| 2010-03-19 | Respondent's condensed book, Submitted in Court (14 copies) | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-03-19 | Appellant's condensed book, Submitted in Court (14 copies) | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2010-03-19 | Acknowledgement and consent for video taping of proceedings, From all parties | |
| 2010-03-19 |
Hearing of the appeal, 2010-03-19, LeB De F Abe Cha Ro Cro Judgment rendered |
|
| 2010-03-10 | Correspondence received from, Gowlings by e-mail, re.: request for 2 reserved seats at the hearing | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-03-09 | Notice of appearance, Susan Hughson will be present at the hearing. | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-03-08 | Order on motion to extend time | |
| 2010-03-08 |
Decision on motion to extend time, to serve and file the respondent's factum and book of authorities to Feb. 17/10 and permitting oral argument at the hearing of the appeal, Abe Granted |
|
| 2010-03-08 | Submission of motion to extend time, Abe | |
| 2010-03-05 | Correspondence received from, Susan Hughson dated March 5, 2010. Re: Disregard the submissions contained in paragraphs 75 - 76 of their factum. (sent to the Court on March 5, 2010) | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-03-04 | Notice of appearance, Charles Davison will be appearing | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2010-02-22 | Motion to extend time, to serve and file the Respondent's Factum and Book of Authorities, Completed on: 2010-02-22 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-02-17 | Respondent's book of authorities, Extension of time to serve and file filed Feb. 22/10, Completed on: 2010-02-17 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-02-17 | Respondent's factum, Extension of time to serve and file filed Feb. 22/10, Completed on: 2010-02-17 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-02-16 | Respondent's record, Vol. 1 to 5, Completed on: 2010-02-16 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2010-02-01 | Appeal perfected for hearing | |
| 2009-12-04 | Appellant's book of authorities, Completed on: 2009-12-04 | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2009-12-04 | Appellant's record, Completed on: 2009-12-04 | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2009-12-04 | Appellant's factum, Completed on: 2009-12-04 | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2009-11-25 | Notice of hearing sent to parties | |
| 2009-11-24 |
Appeal hearing scheduled, 2010-03-19, (start time 9:30) Judgment rendered |
|
| 2009-10-26 | Correspondence received from, C. B. Davison dated Oct. 23/09 re: confirming C. Bauman of Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP acting as agent for the appellant (by fax) | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2009-10-16 | Correspondence received from, C. B. Davison dated Oct. 15/09 re: will advise of his Ottawa agent shortly (by fax) | Jared Eugene Baker |
| 2009-09-28 | Letter advising the parties of tentative hearing date and filing deadlines (Notice of appeal – As of right) | |
| 2009-09-11 | Notice of appeal, (CD-Rom requested and name of his Ottawa agent - rec'd Oct. 26/09), Completed on: 2009-10-26 | Jared Eugene Baker |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Baker, Jared Eugene | Appellant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Her Majesty the Queen | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Baker, Jared Eugene
Counsel
9636 - 102A Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta
T5H 0G5
Telephone: (780) 421-8585
FAX: (780) 425-0472
Email: cbdavison@shaw.ca
Agent
500 - 30 Metcalfe St.
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5L4
Telephone: (613) 235-5327
FAX: (613) 235-3041
Email: cbauman@sgmlaw.com
Party: Her Majesty the Queen
Counsel
Appeals and Prosecution Policy Branch
3rd Fl. Bowker Bldg., 9833 - 109 Street
Edmonton, Alberta
T5K 2E8
Telephone: (780) 422-5402
FAX: (780) 422-1106
Email: sue.hughson@gov.ab.ca
Agent
2600 - 160 Elgin St
P.O. Box 466, Stn "D"
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 1C3
Telephone: (613) 233-1781
FAX: (613) 788-3433
Email: henry.brown@gowlings.com
Summary
Keywords
None.
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Criminal law - Reasonableness of verdict - Defence of mental disorder - Whether the verdict in this case was unreasonable or not supported by the evidence.
The Appellant was convicted of first degree murder. The victim was a former friend of his who was pregnant at the time of the shooting. At trial, the basic facts of the incident were admitted, but the Appellant argued that he was not criminally responsible because of a mental disorder. The psychiatrists who testified at trial all agreed, and the Crown conceded, that at the time of the killing, the Appellant had suffered from amphetamine psychosis. The judge charged the jury accordingly. The only real issue the jury had to consider at trial was whether the Appellant, at the relevant time, knew that shooting his friend was morally wrong, and especially wrong according to the norms of society. The Appellant appealed his conviction, arguing that the jury’s verdict was unreasonable. The majority of the court dismissed the appeal. Martin J.A. would have allowed the appeal on the basis that the evidence supporting the defence of mental disorder was so overwhelming that it rendered the jury’s verdict unreasonable.
Lower court rulings
Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton)
0703-0302-A, 2009 ABCA 252
Appeal dismissed
Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
Factums on appeal
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available