NCA Criminal Law Practice Exam

Question #1 (15 marks)

Dave is charged with the first degree murder of his boss Mr. Reid, contrary to section 231(2) of
the Criminal Code of Canada. A preliminary inquiry is being conducted. The Crown’s allegation
is that Dave poisoned Mr Reid. Evidence showed that Mr. Reid was found by his secretary after
he collapsed in his office shortly after attending lunch with Dave. When Mr. Reid was found he
was conscious but unresponsive. An ambulance was immediately dispatched, and the
paramedics attempted to stabilize Mr. Reid. The paramedics were successful in stabilizing Mr.
Reid to the point at which he could be transferred to the hospital. After receiving treatment for
arsenic poisoning in the hospital Mr. Reid stabilized for a short period of time before going into
sudden cardiac arrest and dying in his hospital bed. During the preliminary inquiry the Crown
called this background evidence, as well as a toxicologist. The toxicologist testified that Mr.
Reid’s blood tested positive for arsenic and that arsenic could lead to sudden cardiac arrest. The
toxicologist also testified that the there was an abnormally high amount of morphine in Mr.
Reid’s blood. Defence counsel produced a significant amount of medical literature during the
cross-examination of the toxicologist to show that according to generally accepted
standards of practice, toxicologists will not identify low levels of arsenic in the blood as a cause
of death or an inducement of cardiac arrest. Defence counsel also led evidence that an overdose
of morphine could result in sudden cardiac arrest. The toxicologist agreed that an overdose of
morphine could result in cardiac arrest but believed that this was likely not the case given the
care that doctors operate.

Several people from Dave’s office were called to testify. Mr. Reid’s secretary gave evidence
that Dave and Mr. Reid had been involved in several very loud and disruptive arguments over
the course of the week leading up to Mr. Reid’s death. Mr. Reid’s boss was also called to testify
that Dave’s company was planning on downsizing and that Dave’s name had been discussed in a
number of layoff discussions. Mr. Reid’s boss also indicated that Dave would be a key member
of the team if Mr. Reid decided to leave the company as Dave and Mr. Reid were the only
employees qualified to operate certain technical instruments which the company relied on. The
Crown also called Dave’s friend Joe who gave evidence that Dave had been very optimistic
about his future and claimed that his big opportunity was just around the corner. The defence
called one witness, Dave’s accountant, who gave evidence that Dave was planning on starting his
own company. Will Dave be committed to stand trial for first degree murder?

TM

PDF Editor
 Question #2 (15 marks)

Assume that Dave was committed to stand trial and that the trial is now being held. All of the
evidence that was led at the preliminary inquiry has been presented at the trial. In addition,
evidence has been presented to the effect that Dave admitted to putting a low dose of arsenic into
Mr. Reid’s soup at lunch in order to make Mr. Reid sick and cause him to miss his vacation that
he had been planning to the Caribbean. Dave also testified that he and Mr. Reid had been
arguing about Dave’s plan to branch out and start his own company. Upon further analysis of
Mr. Reid’s blood it was shown that he had ten times the amount of morphine he should have had
in his system. When the records at the hospital were re-examined the records indicate that Mr.
Reid had been given a 1.0 solution of morphine instead of a 0.1 solution. The difference in these
two solutions is an extremely likely cause of sudden cardiac arrest. When the administering
nurse was questioned it was discovered that she suffers from Dyslexia, a trait shared by the on
call emergency doctor who prescribed morphine for Mr. Reid. What verdict is likely on all of
the evidence, explaining your answer fully.

Question #3 (15 marks)

While playing a game of hockey Sam was hit in the head by a slap shot. Luckily for Sam, the
puck struck the side of his head and the impact was primarily absorbed by the helmet. Although
the puck hit his helmet Sam immediately fell to the ice. After a moment or two Sam recovered
and skated to his bench. Although feeling a bit off for the rest of the game, Sam felt that he was
alright. After the game Sam had a few beers (four to be exact) with his team before heading
home for the evening. Sam was a heavy drinker and the fact that he had four beers did not cause
Same to become inebriated.

The next morning Sam awoke to the police pounding on his front door. Sam quickly discovered
that he had spent the night on the couch. Upon standing up Sam lost his balance and fell into his
coffee table. Hearing the racket from the door, the police immediately entered the premises.
The fact that Sam had left his keys in the door the night before made it easy for the police to gain
entry. Upon entering the premises the police told Sam that he was under arrest for two counts of
criminal negligence causing injury, contrary to section 221 of the Criminal Code of Canada
arising out of a car accident in which another vehicle was run off the road the night before.

Sam has no memory of any events occurring after he took his skates off after the hockey game.
The passengers of the vehicle Sam ran off the road were able to identify Sam and his vehicle as
the driver and vehicle which ran them off the road. The testimony of the injured driver and
passenger is supported by surveillance footage from a nearby factory. Will Sam be convicted of
the offence?
TM

PDF Editor
 Question #4 (20 marks)

Save the Sharks (SOS) is an environmental organization which is dedicated to preserving shark
populations worldwide. SOS is particularly concerned with the capture and sale of shark fins.
With the popularity of sharks increasing due to initiatives such as “Shark Week”, SOS has
gained considerable momentum in its efforts to ban shark fin soup.

In desperate need of a social victory the Mayor of Toronto accepted SOS’s proposition that shark
fin soup should be banned in Toronto. Despite the fact that the Mayor lacked confidence within
the city, the city council approved the ban on shark fin soup. The ban on shark fin soup was
accomplished by enactment of Shark Preservation Act. The relevant portions of the Act read as
follows:

S. 23 (a) Shark fin soup shall not be served within any restaurant in Toronto.

(b) Restaurant is defined as any establishment which prepares and/or sells food for
profit.

S.24 No shark fins shall be sold within Toronto.

S. 31 Anyone found guilty of selling shark fins or shark fin soup shall be liable for a fine
not to exceed $10,000 or 6 months in prison.

Jake is a restaurateur who has established several restaurants and a very successful catering
division based in Mississauga. When Jake was notified about the ramifications of the Shark
Preservation Act Jake immediately removed shark fin soup from his restaurants in Toronto.
Owing to the fact that the ban on shark fin soup only applied to Toronto, Jake’s restaurants in
Mississauga continued to serve Shark fin soup. Jake’s catering division also continued to sell
shark fin soup.

Uncertain about the implications of the Shark Preservation Act on catering companies who buy
and prepare shark fin soup outside Toronto and then deliver the finished product to the city, Jake
contacts the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) to ask if he is able to provide shark fin soup to
catering clients within the city. Amy, the representative who answers the phone at MOE, is
unsure of the correct answer to this question. Accordingly, Amy transfers Jake’s call to her
colleague Bob at the Ministry of Consumer Affairs (MCA). Bob advises Jake that the ban is for
restaurants in Toronto and that there wouldn’t be a problem if the soup was prepared outside the
city for catering purposes.

Relying on this advice, Jake accepts a catering order for a large wedding in Toronto. As part of
this order the client required 200 shark fin soups. Jake completed the order to perfection. One of
the guests at the wedding was a food columnist with the Toronto Star and wrote a glowing
review of Jake’s catering services. The highlight
TM
of the article was a critique of Jake’s shark fin
soup.

PDF Editor
 The day after the Toronto Star article was released the Mayor of Toronto laid charges against
Jake for violating the Shark Preservation Act. You are clerking with the Crown Attorney who
has to decide whether to stay the charges that the Mayor has laid, or whether to proceed with
them. Jake’s lawyer has written to you asking that the charges be stayed. Provide a memo
indicating your opinion as to whether there is a reasonable prospect that Jake has committed the
offence charged, giving a complete analysis of the appropriate legal standards.

Question #5 (15 marks)

On an evening when Scott and his friends were out celebrating Scott’s 21st birthday Scott
became extremely drunk and the effects of the alcohol lowered Scott’s inhibitions and caused
him to do a number of things that he would not normally have done. Unfortunately for Scott, his
activities on this evening are more than drunken regrets; they are criminal. Scott’s illegal
activities on the night of his birthday are as follows:

 Contrary to s. 265 of the Criminal Code, Scott committed an assault by starting a bar
fight when a fellow patron spilt his drink on Scott. In the ensuing fight Scott broke the
other patron’s nose.

 Contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code, Scott committed sexual assault when he was
dancing with a female bar patron and began touching her inappropriately. When Scott
made his initial move on the female bar patron she rejected his advances. Because Scott
was drunk he thought the woman was playing hard to get and he continued to grab at her.

 Contrary to s. 465 of the Criminal Code, Scott committed conspiracy by conspiring with
a group of individuals at the bar to rob the local late night food stand after last call. Scott
was involved in every step of the planning. At 2:15 am (15 minutes after last call) the
group of individuals Scott had conspired with robbed the food stand. Scott did not take
part in the robbery.

You have been retained by Scott on a Legal Aid certificate. Advise Scott if he will be able to use
the intoxications defences.

TM

PDF Editor
 Question #6 (20 marks)

Sandy, an aboriginal activist, was participating in an Idle No More rally when a group of men
approached members of the Idle No More movement and began heckling them. At first Sandy
resisted the taunts of the crowd and continued his participation in the drum circle. However,
when one of the men insulted Sandy’s mother, Sandy lost his cool and attacked the man. Aside
from his pride, the man was not seriously hurt.

Owing to the attention that is normally garnered by Idle No More events the police were at the
rally when the incident occurred. The police quickly intervened to break up the altercation.
Owing to the fact that the assaulted man’s pride was hurt, he proceeded with charging Sandy for
assault contrary to s. 265 of the Criminal Code of Canada. At trial Sandy was unsuccessful in his
efforts to raise the defence of provocation. You have found Sandy guilty of assault and are now
at the sentencing stage. Imposed a reasoned sentence on Sandy for his offence.

TM

PDF Editor