Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
R v Latimer, [2001] 1 SCR 3 was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the controversial case of Robert Latimer, a Saskatchewan farmer convicted of murdering his disabled daughter, Tracy Latimer. The case sparked an intense national debate as to the ethics of what was claimed as a mercy killing. [1]
The Supreme Court ultimately overturned Latimer's conviction due to the Crown's improper actions at the jury selection stage. As a result, the decision was the first given by the Supreme Court in the Latimer case, the second being R v Latimer [2] on cruel and unusual punishment under section 12 of the Charter.
This case caused a national controversy concerning the definition and ethics of euthanasia as well as the rights of people with disabilities, [1] and resulted in two Supreme Court decisions, R. v. Latimer (1997), on section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and later R. v. Latimer (2001), concerning cruel and unusual ...
The Court again considered whether a minimum prison sentence perceived as lengthy would be cruel and unusual in the case R. v. Latimer. [7] Latimer, who had murdered his disabled daughter, argued the 10 years that he would definitely serve (he could be in prison for longer if denied parole) was so long as to be cruel and unusual. The basis of ...
Case name Argued Decided McLachlin L'Heureux-Dubé Gonthier Iacobucci Major Bastarache Binnie Arbour LeBel R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3; 2001 SCC 1 : June 14, 2000 ...
In R. v. Latimer (1997), the Supreme Court of Canada considered an argument in which a person, Robert Latimer, was told he was being "detained", but was not told he was being "arrested" and could be charged with the murder of his daughter. The Court found section 10(a) was not infringed.
Westchester County Executive George Latimer speaks at a press conference in Mount Vernon on June 24, 2024 to announce the endorsement of eight Black clergy members for his primary race for Congress
R v Malmo-Levine; R v Caine [2003] 3 S.C.R. 571, 2003 SCC 74 December 23, 2003 Possession of marijuana charter challenge R v Clay [2003] 3 S.C.R. 735, 2003 SCC 75 December 23, 2003 Possession of marijuana charter challenge (second) Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v Canada (AG) [2004] 1 S.C.R. 76, 2004 SCC 4 January 30, 2004