Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

R. v. Austin

Collection Supreme Court Judgments
Date 1996-01-31
Report [1996] 1 SCR 72
Case number 24486
Judges Lamer, Antonio; La Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Iacobucci, Frank; Major, John C.
On appeal from British Columbia
Subjects Criminal law
Notes SCC Case Information: 24486

Decision Content

R. v. Austin, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 72

 

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                   Appellant

 

v.

 

Norman Rolland Austin                                                                     Respondent

 

Indexed as:  R. v. Austin

 

File No.:  24486.

 

1996:  January 31.

 

Present:  Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

 

on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia

 

                   Criminal law ‑‑ Sentencing ‑‑ Firearms ‑‑ Mandatory prohibition order ‑‑ Trial judge's imposition of ten‑year firearms prohibition restored.

 

                   APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (1994), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 252, 36 C.R. (4th) 241, 50 B.C.A.C. 241, 82 W.A.C. 241, allowing the accused's appeal from the sentence imposed by Trueman Prov. Ct. J.  Appeal allowed.

 

                   Wendy Rubin, for the appellant.

 

                   Christine Birnie, for the respondent.

 

                   The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

 

1                 Lamer C.J. ‑‑ We are all of the view, for the reasons of Chief Justice McEachern, to allow this appeal, set aside the order of the Court of Appeal and restore the trial judge's order.

 

                   Judgment accordingly.

 

                   Solicitor for the appellant:  Wendy Rubin, Vancouver.

 

                   Solicitor for the respondent:  Christine Birnie, Telkwa, B.C.

 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.