Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

R. v. Pizzardi; R. v. Levis, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1018

 

Richard Pizzardi           Appellant

 

v.

 

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                   Respondent

 

and between

 

Steven Levis                                                                                      Appellant

 

v.

 

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                   Respondent

 

Indexed as:  R. v. Pizzardi; R. v. Levis

 

File Nos.:  23760*, 23809.

 

1994:  December 9.

 


Present:  La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

 

on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario

 

                   Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights  ‑‑ Fundamental justice ‑‑ Criminal law ‑‑ Conspiracy to commit robbery ‑‑ One accused convicted and sentenced and other acquitted ‑‑ Appeals taken against conviction and sentence and against acquittal ‑‑ Whether two accused part of same conspiracy from beginning ‑‑ Whether manner of prosecution violated fundamental principles of justice underlying community's sense of decency and fair play.

 

                   APPEALS from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (1993), 21 W.C.B. (2d) 123, firstly dismissing an appeal against conviction by Cusson J. but allowing appeal against sentence, and secondly allowing an appeal against acquittal by Cusson J.  Appeals dismissed.

 

                   Alan D. Gold, for the appellant Richard Pizzardi.

 

                   Gregory Lafontaine, for the appellant Steven Levis.

 

                   Renee M. Pomerance, for the respondent.

 

                   The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

 

                   La Forest J. ‑‑ These are appeals as of right.  We are all of the view that the appeals should be dismissed for the reasons given by the Court of Appeal of Ontario.  The appeals are accordingly dismissed.

 

                   Judgment accordingly.

 

                   Solicitors for the appellants:  Gold & Fuerst, Toronto.

 

                   Solicitor for the respondent:  The Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.

 



     * See Erratum [1995] 1 S.C.R. iv

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.