According to the Supreme Court of Canada's automatism decision in R. v. Parks (1992), sleepwalking is always considered a disease of the mind and an accused who commits an offence while sleepwalking will never be considered to be in a state of non-insane automatism.

Question 1 options:

True False

According to the Supreme Court of Canada's automatism decision in R. v. Stone (1999), where the accused raises the defence of automatism the Crown has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's actions were voluntary.

Question 3 options: True False

What are the three requirements to the defence of necessity, according to the 2001 Supreme Court of Canada decision inR. v. Latimer? With respect to each requirement, is the test subjective, objective, or something else?