R. v. Donawa
| Date | March 26, 2025 |
| Neutral Citation | 2025 CSC 10 |
| On Appeal From | Court of Appeal for Ontario |
| Judges | Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin, Moreau |
| Case Number | 41287 |
The Supreme Court has confirmed that a man was wrongly acquitted of various firearms offences.
This appeal concerned what constitutes a “firearm” for the purposes of various firearms offences under the Criminal Code . This term is defined in section 2 of the Code as any weapon capable of causing serious bodily harm or death by means of a barrel from which any projectile can be discharged, including the frame or receiver of such a weapon and anything that can be modified to be used as such.
During a traffic stop, police found a handgun in Mr. Amari Donawa’s belt bag. The weapon in question was sent to the Centre of Forensic Sciences, but for unexplained reasons, the police did not send the magazine or ammunition. Mr. Donawa has been charged with various firearms-related offenses.
At trial, the expert testified that it was not easy to fire the handgun without the magazine. The trial judge concluded that the weapon in question was not a firearm because, according to the expert, making the weapon operational required special expertise, considerable time, and parts that could not be readily obtained by Mr. Donawa. The trial judge therefore acquitted Mr. Donawa of the various firearms-related offenses with which he was charged.
The Crown appealed these acquittals to the Ontario Court of Appeal. The main issue on appeal was whether the trial judge was correct in finding that the handgun was not a firearm within the definition in section 2 of the Code .
The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the Crown’s appeal and set aside the acquittals. In the Court of Appeal’s view, the trial judge made a number of errors in deciding that the Crown had not proven that the handgun was a firearm. The trial judge failed to consider that there was a magazine in the handgun when the police found it, and that the expert witness had testified that the handgun could be used if a magazine were inserted. The trial judge also failed to consider Mr. Donawa’s statement to the police that he had fired the handgun at a shooting range. The trial judge focused on whether the handgun could be modified for use as a firearm without considering whether the handgun, as found, could be used as a firearm without modification. The failure to consider all of the evidence relevant to the ultimate issue of guilt or innocence constituted an error of law that justified setting aside the acquittals on the firearms offences. The Court of Appeal entered convictions on two counts (careless storage of a firearm and possession of a firearm with an altered serial number), and ordered a new trial on the remaining counts.
Mr. Donawa appealed the Court of Appeal’s decision and sought to have his acquittals reinstated. When a person is acquitted of certain criminal offences at trial, but the acquittal is overturned and the Court of Appeal enters a guilty verdict, the person has the right to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada on any question of law.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
Accordingly, the order of the Court of Appeal finding Mr. Donawa guilty on certain counts and directing a new trial on other counts is confirmed.
Justice Martin read the Court’s judgment. You can watch the video here .
