Similar Fact Evidence (Cases): Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "\)\|, ([0-9]+) CCC" to ")|$1 CCC" |
m Text replacement - "{{perSCC|Binnie J}}" to "{{perSCC-H|Binnie J}}" Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|Jesse|28gkd|2010 BCCA 108 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Chiasson JA}} |admitted | Upheld at 2012 SCC 21.}} | {{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|Jesse|28gkd|2010 BCCA 108 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Chiasson JA}} |admitted | Upheld at 2012 SCC 21.}} | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|JH|1q3wl|2006 CanLII 40664 ( | {{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|JH|1q3wl|2006 CanLII 40664 (ON CA)}}{{perONCA|Lang JA}} | Not admitted| the accused was alleged to have sexually assault his 12 year old step-sister---SFE was of victim's report of consensual oral sex years before--court said consensual sex separate from sexual assault }} | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Brown|1v3h4|2006 CanLII 60340 (ON CA)| [2006] OJ No 5276 (ONCA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}|admitted | }} | {{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Brown|1v3h4|2006 CanLII 60340 (ON CA)| [2006] OJ No 5276 (ONCA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}|admitted | }} | ||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|Stewart|1gclz|2004 BCCA 56 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Hall JA}} | admitted | The accused was a doctor accused of touching female patients. He claimed the touching was accidental. }} | {{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|Stewart|1gclz|2004 BCCA 56 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Hall JA}} | admitted | The accused was a doctor accused of touching female patients. He claimed the touching was accidental. }} | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Blake|1fzl6|2003 CanLII 13682 (ON CA)|181 CCC (3d) 169 | {{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Blake|1fzl6|2003 CanLII 13682 (ON CA)|181 CCC (3d) 169}}{{perONCA|Simmons JA}} (2:1) aff'd [http://canlii.ca/t/1j0wd 2004 SCC 69] (CanLII){{TheCourtSCC}} | rejected | The evidence consisted of prior touching of children aged 10 years or under on two occasions in the past. Both prior incidents involved genital touching and occurred in private. The accused told one of the children that he was sorry and that it would not happen again. The court found the similarities lacking in detail and non-specific conduct.}} | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Shearing|51rb|2002 SCC 58 (CanLII)| | {{TCase|{{CanLIIRP-S|Shearing|51rb|2002 SCC 58 (CanLII)|[2002] 3 SCR 33}}{{perSCC-H|Binnie J}} | | }} | ||
{{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|KW|6hxm|1996 CanLII 396 (ON CA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}| not admitted | The accused was charged with two counts of sexual assault in relation to two complainants. Few facts are given by Court of Appeal. Judge admitted the similar fact evidence. Court of Appeal disagreed and found it as "insufficiently similar".}} | {{TCase|{{CanLIIR-S|KW|6hxm|1996 CanLII 396 (ON CA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}| not admitted | The accused was charged with two counts of sexual assault in relation to two complainants. Few facts are given by Court of Appeal. Judge admitted the similar fact evidence. Court of Appeal disagreed and found it as "insufficiently similar".}} | ||
{{TCaseEnd}} | {{TCaseEnd}} |
Latest revision as of 15:21, 30 April 2023
Similar Fact Evidence
Case Name | Result | Summary |
---|---|---|
R v Edwards, 2014 ONSC 3729 (CanLII), per Donohue J | admitted | multiple robberies |
R v Donszelmann, 2014 ABQB 284 (CanLII), per Clackson J | admitted | multiple fraudulent sales made by accused admissible across all charges |
R v TIE, 2014 MBCA 40 (CanLII), per Monnin and Burnett JJA | admitted | sexual assault against two boys. |
R v DLW, 2013 BCSC 1016 (CanLII), per Romilly J | admitted | detailed summary of law by Romilly J. multiple victims of sexual assault. |
R v JW, 2013 ONCA 89 (CanLII), per Weiler JA | admitted | Appeal court overrules failure to admit similar fact evidence |
R v Fletcher, 2013 ABCA 74 (CanLII), per curiam | Not admitted | |
R v JR, 2012 CanLII 81292 (NLSCTD), per Goodridge J | admitted | |
R v Edwards, 2013 ONSC 835 (CanLII), per Mennie J | Not admitted | SFE of two prior incidents going to identity rejected |
R v O’Quinn, 2012 CanLII 67731 (NLPC), per [[Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador|]] | admitted ( limited purpose) | The accused was charged with domestic violence offences against girlfriend. There were 4 prior instances of violence against 4 prior girlfriends. |
R v Patey, 2012 CanLII 37589 (NLSCTD), per Seaborn J | admitted | |
R v Logan, 2012 BCCA 102 (CanLII), per Saunders JA | admitted | |
R v Webb, 2012 CanLII 1972 (NLSCTD), per Goodridge J | Not admitted | |
R v Blea, 2012 ABCA 41 (CanLII), per curiam | admitted | similar fact evidence admitted of two prior sexual assaults |
R v Boden, 2011 BCPC 366 (CanLII), per Giardini J | Not admitted | |
R v Carpenter, 2010 BCCA 27 (CanLII), per Hall JA | admitted | Two complainants reported similar sexual assaults involving an attack by a man without pants who would put a pillow case over the complainant's head. DNA linking the accused was found at scene of one of two assaults. |
R v Jesse, 2010 BCCA 108 (CanLII), per Chiasson JA | admitted | Upheld at 2012 SCC 21. |
R v JH, 2006 CanLII 40664 (ON CA), per Lang JA | Not admitted | the accused was alleged to have sexually assault his 12 year old step-sister---SFE was of victim's report of consensual oral sex years before--court said consensual sex separate from sexual assault |
R v Brown, 2006 CanLII 60340 (ON CA), [2006] OJ No 5276 (ONCA), per curiam |
admitted | |
R v Morin, 2005 CanLII 37252 (ON CA), [2005] OJ No 4402 (ONCA), per curiam |
admitted | |
R v W(S), , [2004] OJ No 4164 (ONCA)(*no CanLII links) | admitted | |
R v Grabowski, 2004 BCSC 328 (CanLII), per Bennett J | admitted | 5 instances of arson in the same geographical area within 2 hours. |
R v Stewart, 2004 BCCA 56 (CanLII), per Hall JA | admitted | The accused was a doctor accused of touching female patients. He claimed the touching was accidental. |
R v Blake, 2003 CanLII 13682 (ON CA), 181 CCC (3d) 169, per Simmons JA (2:1) aff'd 2004 SCC 69 (CanLII), per curiam |
rejected | The evidence consisted of prior touching of children aged 10 years or under on two occasions in the past. Both prior incidents involved genital touching and occurred in private. The accused told one of the children that he was sorry and that it would not happen again. The court found the similarities lacking in detail and non-specific conduct. |
R v Shearing, 2002 SCC 58 (CanLII), [2002] 3 SCR 33, per Binnie J |
||
R v KW, 1996 CanLII 396 (ON CA), per curiam | not admitted | The accused was charged with two counts of sexual assault in relation to two complainants. Few facts are given by Court of Appeal. Judge admitted the similar fact evidence. Court of Appeal disagreed and found it as "insufficiently similar". |