Jean-Philippe Mailhot Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen, 2013 SCC 17

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. Mailhot, 2013 SCC 17, [2013] 2 S.C.R. 96 Date: 20130328 Docket: 34881 Between: Jean-Philippe Mailhot Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Coram: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver and Wagner JJ. Reasons for Judgment: (paras. 1 to 2) The Court R. v. Mailhot, 2013 SCC 17, [2013] 2 S.C.R. 96 Jean-Philippe Mailhot Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. Mailhot 2013 SCC 17 File No.: 34881. 2013: March 19; 2013: March 28.

Present: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver and Wagner JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec Criminal law — Trial — Charge to jury — Fairness — Trial judge providing jurors with

summary of theory of defence but also providing opinion on evidence in support of, or contrary to, that theory — Accused convicted of second degree murder — Whether

opinions offered by trial judge amounted to opinions as to verdict. Held: The appeal should be allowed and a new trial ordered. APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal (Duval Hesler, Beauregard and Doyon JJ.A.), 2012 QCCA 964, SOQUIJ AZ-50858815, [2012] J.Q. no 4863 (QL), 2012 CarswellQue 5082, upholding the accused’s conviction for second degreemurder. Appeal allowed. Nicholas St-Jacques, Lida Sara Nouraie and Christian Desrosiers, for the appellant. Carole Lebeuf and Alexandre Boucher, for the respondent.

The following is the judgment delivered by [1] The Court — We all agree with Doyon J.A., dissenting in the Court of Appeal, that a new trial is required becauseof the effect of the trial judge’s charge on the fairness of the trial (2012 QCCA 964 ). [2] Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and a new trial is ordered. Appeal allowed. Solicitors for the appellant: Desrosiers, Joncas, Massicotte, Montréal. Solicitor for the respondent: Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales du Québec, Montréal.