Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t! This week, lawyer Kyla Lee discusses assisted dying
Acumen Law Corporation lawyer Kyla Lee gives her take on a made-in-Canada court case each week and discusses why these cases should have been heard by Canada’s highest court: the Supreme Court of Canada.
Nedeljko Mikasinovic was convicted by a jury of assault causing bodily harm. He had originally been charged with aggravated assault and prior to that, had an original trial for two charges including aggravated assault. In his first trial, the jury couldn’t reach a verdict on whether or not he had committed the offence and there was a hung jury and a new trial on that charge was ordered.
Because he was acquited on the first charge, and ultimately convicted of a lesser included offence, sentencing became a very complicated process. Mr. Mikasinovic argued at his hearing that he should not be sentenced for the offence on which he was acquited, nor should he be sentenced for the consequences of an aggravated assault since he was convicted only of a lesser included offence.
Mr. Mikasinovic sought leave to the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing that sentencing judges should not be able to take into account the things in which he had been acquited.
Unfortunately, the SCC did not see the nuance that was present here and the nuance that impacts so many people who are agreeing to plead guilty to lesser charges every day or who are found guilty of lesser charges by judges every day throughout this country.
Watch the video for more.
