Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content





Citation: R. v. Bruce, 2011 SCC 4

Date: 20110202

Docket: 33735



Derek Dwight Bruce



Her Majesty The Queen



Coram: LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ.


Reasons for Judgment:

(paras. 1 to 2)


Dissenting Reasons:

(para. 3)

LeBel J. (Deschamps, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ. concurring)


Fish J.


Note: This document is subject to editorial revision before its reproduction in final form in the Canada Supreme Court Reports.



r. v. bruce


Derek Dwight Bruce                                                                                       Appellant


Her Majesty The Queen                                                                              Respondent


Indexed as:  R. v. Bruce


2011 SCC 4


File No.:  33735.


2011:  January 19; 2011:  February 2.


Present:  LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta

                    Criminal Law Reasonable Verdict — Appellant challenging adequacy of evidence identifying him as assailant — Whether decision of trial judge supported by evidence.

                    Held (Fish J. dissenting):  The appeal should be dismissed.

Statutes and Regulations Cited

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 , s. 691(1) (a).

                    APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (Berger, O’Brien and Bielby JJ.A.), 2010 ABCA 131, 477 A.R. 208, 483 W.A.C. 208, [2010] A.J. No. 433 (QL), upholding the accused’s conviction.  Appeal dismissed, Fish J. dissenting.

                    Akram Attia and Daryl J. Royer, for the appellant.

                    David C. Marriott, Q.C., for the respondent.

The judgment of LeBel, Deschamps, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ. was delivered by


                    LeBel J.

[1]                              The Court is seized with an appeal as of right brought under s. 691(1) (a) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 , from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (2010 ABCA 131, 477 A.R. 208) rendered on April 22, 2010. A majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a judgment of the Alberta Provincial Court (Chrumka J.) declaring the appellant, Derek Dwight Bruce, guilty on counts of breaking and entering, committing assault causing bodily harm and possession of a weapon.

[2]                              I am of the view that the appeal fails. Although this appeal does not raise only issues of credibility, I agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the trial judge’s decision was reasonable, was supported by the evidence and that he had committed no error in the application of the relevant law to the facts. For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

The following are the reasons delivered by



                    Fish J.

[3]                              With respect for those who are of a different view, I would allow the appeal and order a new trial, essentially on the ground that the decision of the trial judge rests on inferences that do not flow logically and reasonably from the evidence upon which they are made to rest, notably on the issue of identification ― the only real issue in this case.

                    Appeal dismissed, Fish J. dissenting.

                    Solicitors for the appellant:  Attia Reeves Tensfeldt Snow, Edmonton.

                    Solicitor for the respondent:  Attorney General of Alberta, Edmonton.








Save and organize search results from SCC and CanLII, get alerts.

Get started with Lexbox


Twitter Notices

Get real-time notices of new Supreme Court decisions via Twitter.

Follow Lexum on Twitter


For 20 years now, the Lexum site has been the main public source for Supreme Court decisions.