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.
35510
Eric Vokurka v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Newfoundland & Labrador) (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) |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Vokurka, Eric | Appellant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Her Majesty the Queen | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Vokurka, Eric
Counsel
Bob Buckingham
81 Bond Street
St. John's, Newfoundland & Labrador
A1C 1T2
Telephone: (709) 739-6688
FAX: (709) 739-6686
Email: keir@buckinghamlaw.ca
Agent
85 Plymouth St.
Ottawa, Ontario
K1S 3E2
Telephone: (613) 233-4474 Ext: 290
FAX: (613) 233-8868
Email: hgeller@doucetmcbride.com
Party: Her Majesty the Queen
Counsel
215 Water Street
St. John's, Newfoundland & Labrador
A1C 6C9
Telephone: (709) 729-5022
FAX: (709) 729-1135
Email: iainhollett@gov.nl.ca
Agent
441 MacLaren Street
Suite 200
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 2H3
Telephone: (613) 236-9665
FAX: (613) 235-4430
Email: rhouston@burkerobertson.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 - Aggravated assault - Defence of accident - Misapprehension of evidence - Whether the trial judge erred by failing to explain why inferences supporting the defence of accident were not accepted.
The appellant was convicted of aggravated assault. The trial judge found that he intentionally cut his friend and co-worker’s arm. The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence respecting his relationship with the complainant and that it proved an absence of motive, that he misapprehended the evidence respecting the appellant’s intoxication by failing to appreciate that it militated in favour of finding that he accidentally cut the complainant, that the trial judge’s inference that the appellant intended to cut the complainant was unreasonable, and that the verdict was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence. The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Welsh J.A., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and entered an acquittal. In his view, the trial judge erred by failing to explain why inferences supporting the defence of accident were not accepted.
Lower court rulings
Supreme Court of Newfoundland & Labrador, Trial Division
Appellant convicted of aggravated assault
Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador - Court of Appeal
12/76, 2013 NLCA 51
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