Does a trial judge have to consider the evidence that supports a finding of criminal negligence in a dangerous driving case?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. Lockhart, 1993 CanLII 501 (BC CA):
36 The trial judge's finding of criminal negligence was not only based upon the appellant's knowledge of the defects in the vehicle, it was also based upon the appellant's failure to see the approaching motorcyclist on the open road in front of him and upon his having had some drink. In my opinion the learned judge's reasoning is supported by the reasoning of this court in Regina v. Wingerter (1987), 46 M.V.R. 313 at p. 319. In that case, Anderson J.A., writing for the court in a case involving a charge of dangerous driving causing bodily harm, held that the trial judge was entitled to take into account not only the abnormal driving but other conduct of the accused including his falling asleep at the wheel, his statements and the evidence of his drinking. In my opinion, the learned trial judge did not err in the approach he took in reaching his conclusions.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is a trial judge's failure to give reasons sufficient to determine that the trial judge erred in appreciation of a relevant issue or application of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a trial judge bound to comment upon all the evidence at trial to support an expert testimony? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a trial judge has a duty to make a decision based on expert testimony? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law in which the trial judge’s decision to accept or reject the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a summary trial judge make a finding that a matter is not suitable for disposition by way of summary trial during the hearing of the summary trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an appellate court "reconsider" evidence presented at trial when there is a reasoned belief that the trial judge must have forgotten or misconceived the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
What factors will the Court consider in deciding whether it would be unjust to find that a summary trial is appropriate to consider the issues before deciding whether to proceed with a conventional trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a finding that a judge must not make a finding which would directly contradict a finding previously made by another judge? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a adjudicator's reasoning be manifestly flawed where the adjudicator failed to consider the evidence supporting the findings of two witnesses? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the medical evidence that supports medical evidence in support of future care costs? (British Columbia, Canada)
