Criminal Law

R v S.B.: Accountability, Youth Sentencing, and the Limits of Social Context

The Supreme Court of Canada’s (“SCC”) decision in R. v. S.B., 2025 SCC 24 [S.B.] engages critical questions regarding the Youth Criminal Justice Act’s (“YCJA”) framework for imposing adult sentences on young offenders. The role of social context evidence is central when evaluating whether the Crown successfully rebutted the presumption of diminished moral blameworthiness under section 72(1) of the YCJA. This appeal tests the boundaries of how youth courts weigh personal and systemic circumstances against the judgement and maturity displayed through the planning of criminal conduct.

Truth vs. Fairness in Sentencing: Lessons from R v Di Paola

In the decision of R v Di Paola, 2025 SCC 31 the Supreme Court of Canada examined how s. 725(1)(c) of the Criminal Code should be interpreted during sentencing. The issue was whether a sentencing judge may consider, as aggravating factors, facts that could constitute a separate offence when that charge has already been laid but is no longer pending and has no rendered verdict. The Court’s decision clarifies both the scope of this provision and the Crown’s duty of fairness in presenting aggravating facts during sentencing.

R v Kinamore: The Problem with Perfect Symmetry in Sexual Assault Trials

The Supreme Court of Canada recently released its decision in R v Kinamore, clarifying that a complainant's sexual inactivity amounts to sexual history under s. 276 of the Criminal Code. Evidence of one’s sexual inactivity is therefore presumptively inadmissible unless first vetted through a voir dire, a pre-trial hearing to determine admissibility. The Court further clarified that this requirement applies regardless of which party introduces the evidence.

R v Jaser and the Supreme Court’s Silence on National Security Appeals

In August 2025, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear Raed Jaser’s latest appeal in the high-profile terrorism prosecution arising from the 2013 VIA Rail plot. As is customary in leave to appeal decisions, no reasons were provided.

R v JW: Programming-Based Sentencing, “Wrongful Conduct,” and Enhanced Credit

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v JW addresses two intertwined controversies in Canadian sentencing law. First, it clarifies whether—and how—a sentencing judge may take account of the time an offender is likely to need to complete institutional programming when setting a custodial term. Second, it refines the meaning of “wrongful conduct” for the purpose of denying enhanced pre-sentence credit under s 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code.

Texting Impersonations: SCC Weighs Digital Privacy in R v Campbell

In R v. Campbell, 2024 SCC 42 (“Campbell”), the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) weighed in on whether the police had lawful authority to use the cellphone of a drug dealer without a warrant to continue a text message conversation with an alleged drug distributor. In a 6-3 split, the SCC held that while there was a violation of section 8 of the Charter and Rights and Freedoms [“Charter”], the warrantless search of Mr. Campbell was justified under the exigent circumstances exception outlined in section 11(7) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”).

APPEAL WATCH: Revisiting the admissibility of similar fact evidence in R v Chizanga

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) will soon hear the appeal of R v Chizanga, 2024 ONCA 545 [Chizanga], in which it will opine on the principles of admitting evidence of prior discreditable conduct [41405].  Building upon the seminal case of R v Handy, 2002 SCC 56 [Handy] which set out the principles for the admissibility of such evidence, this appeal […]

APPEAL WATCH: R v McKee: Is Information of Police Misconduct First-Party Disclosure?

In R v McKee [41110], the Supreme Court (SCC) will decide whether a document in the possession of the Crown – containing information of police misconduct – obtained in respect of a unrelated investigation constitutes first-party disclosure automatically provided to the accused. This decision will likely turn on whether the Supreme Court adopts a narrow or broad […]

R v Stevenson: SCC upholds conviction on Vetrovec testimony

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) has dismissed the appeal in R v Stevenson, 2024 SCC 41 [Stevenson], upholding a trial judge’s decision to convict based on the evidence of an unsavoury or Vetrovec witness. This case was heard by the SCC as of right from the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (“SKCA”) 2024 SKCA 40 […]

R v Hanrahan: SCC Rejects Argument to Establish a Standard of “Clear and Unambiguous” for the Admission of Prior Sexual History

R v. Hanrahan, 2025 SCC 1 is a short oral decision —  a mere paragraph dismissing the Crown’s appeal against a sexual assault acquittal. The Supreme Court affirmed the Newfoundland Court of Appeal’s decision (R. v. Hanrahan, 2024 NLCA 9, “NLCA Decision”) and in doing so they affirmed deference to the trial judge’s factual findings […]