James Steven Wilcox Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen, 2014 SCC 75

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. Wilcox, 2014 SCC 75, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 616 Date: 20141208 Docket: 35758 Between: James Steven Wilcox Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent and Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario and Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida Interveners Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner and Gascon JJ. Reasons for Judgment: (para. 1) Karakatsanis J. (McLachlin C.J. and Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Wagner and Gascon JJ. concurring) r. v. wilcox, 2014 SCC 75, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 616 James Steven Wilcox Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

and Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario and Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida Interveners Indexed as: R. v. Wilcox 2014 SCC 75 File No.: 35758. 2014: December 8.

Present: McLachlin C.J. and Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner and Gascon JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec Criminal law ― Evidence ― Assessment ― Accused convicted of aggravated sexual assault as a result of havingtransmitted HIV to complainant ― Trial judge finding that complainant would not have engaged in sexual relations had he known aboutaccused’s HIV positive status ― Trial judge properly analyzed complainant’s credibility in light of evidence as a whole. Cases Cited Referred to: R. v. W. (D.), (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal (Dalphond, Hilton and Bélanger JJ.A.), 2014 QCCA 321, 307C.C.C. (3d) 355, SOQUIJ AZ-51046931, [2014] Q.J. No. 1180 (QL), 2014 CarswellQue 1137, upholding the accused’s conviction foraggravated sexual assault. Appeal dismissed. Jeffrey K. Boro and Jonathan Gordon, for the appellant. Dennis Galiatsatos and Richard Audet, for the respondent. Jonathan A. Shime and Amanda Ross, for the intervener the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Ryan Peck, for the intervener the HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario.

Liz Lacharpagne, for the intervener Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

[1] Karakatsanis J. — This is an appeal as of right on a question of law. We agree with the majority of the QuebecCourt of Appeal that it was open to the trial judge to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant would not have engaged insexual relations had he known about the appellant’s HIV positive status. The fact that the trial judge also found that it was possible thatthe sexual relationship continued after disclosure, despite the complainant’s denial, does not necessarily render that first findingunreasonable.

While it would have been preferable for the trial judge to more fully explain his reasoning relating to the complainant’scredibility, we are not satisfied that the trial judge erred in the analytical process set out in R. v. W. (D.), (SCC), [1991] 1S.C.R. 742, or that he failed to analyze the evidence as a whole relating to an ultimate issue. The appeal is dismissed. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: Boro, Polnicky, Lighter, Montréal. Solicitor for the respondent: Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecution Services of Quebec, Montréal.

Solicitors for the intervener the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network: Cooper, Sandler, Shime & Bergman, Toronto. Solicitor for the intervener the HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario: HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario, Toronto. Solicitor for the intervener Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida: Coalition desorganismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida, Montréal.