[1] In its decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the crime could not be justified through the defence of necessity and found that, despite the special circumstances of the case, the lengthy prison sentence given to Latimer was not cruel and unusual and therefore not a breach of section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The prison sentence was thus upheld, although the court specifically noted that the federal government had the power to pardon him.

He was convicted of second-degree murder, but in R v Latimer,[2] the Supreme Court overturned that finding due to the Crown's improper actions at the jury selection stage.

The trial judge held that on the facts of the particular case, that sentence would be cruel and unusual, contrary to s. 12 of the Charter.

The decision upholding the life sentence with no parole eligibility for ten years was unanimous and was written by the court.

The court went on to find that Latimer had other alternatives to killing his daughter, namely that "he could have struggled on", albeit "with what was unquestionably a difficult situation".

The court went on to reject the argument that the trial was unfair because the chances of jury nullification were impaired by the judge.

Finally, the court rejected the argument that the minimum ten-year sentence might be so long as to be cruel and unusual and thus unconstitutional under section 12 of the Charter.