// Workers AI · dad joke modeWhat did Kienapple say to R? Let's appeal to each other.
| Kienapple v R | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Hearing: Judgment: 1974 | |
| Full case name | John Edward Kienapple v Her Majesty the Queen |
| Court membership | |
| Chief Justice: Gérald Fauteux Puisne Justices: Douglas Abbott, Ronald Martland, Wilfred Judson, Roland Ritchie, Emmett Hall, Wishart Spence, Louis-Philippe Pigeon, Bora Laskin | |
| Reasons given | |
| Majority | Laskin, joined by Judson, Spence, Pigeon, and Dickson |
| Dissent | Ritchie, joined by Fauteux, Abbott, and Martland |
Kienapple v R, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that established the rule against multiple convictions known as the Kienapple principle. Justice Bora Laskin, for the court, held that an accused cannot be convicted of two offences where they both arise out of substantially the same facts.
John Edward Kienapple was charged with rape and unlawful sexual intercourse with a female under 14 years of age. At trial he was convicted on both charges. On appeal to the Supreme Court his conviction for unlawful sexual intercourse was overturned.
See also
[edit]External links
[edit]
.svg){kind=small}  | This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by adding missing information. |