Criminal Law Notebook

Preliminary Inquiry Evidence: Difference between revisions

← Older edit
Visual
m Text replacement - "\[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([a-zA-Z0-9]+)\s[\s]+" to "[http://canlii.ca/t/$1 "
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
m Text replacement - "\{\{fr\|([^\}\}]+)\}\}" to "fr:$1"
 
(39 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[fr:Preuve_de_l%27enquête_préliminaire]]
{{Currency2|January|2020}}
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderPrelim}}
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderPrelim}}
==General Principles==
==General Principles==
During a preliminary inquiry, the justice presiding the inquiry will accept evidence from witnesses and will permit cross-examination.
During a preliminary inquiry, the justice presiding the inquiry will accept evidence from witnesses and will permit cross-examination.


{{quotation2|
{{quotation3|
; Taking evidence
; Taking evidence
540 (1) Where an accused is before a justice holding a preliminary inquiry, the justice shall
540 (1) Where an accused is before a justice holding a preliminary inquiry, the justice shall
Line 10: Line 12:
::(i) in legible writing in the form of a deposition, in Form 31 {{AnnSec|Form 31}}, or by a stenographer appointed by him or pursuant to law, or
::(i) in legible writing in the form of a deposition, in Form 31 {{AnnSec|Form 31}}, or by a stenographer appointed by him or pursuant to law, or
::(ii) in a province where a sound recording apparatus is authorized by or under provincial legislation for use in civil cases, by the type of apparatus so authorized and in accordance with the requirements of the provincial legislation.
::(ii) in a province where a sound recording apparatus is authorized by or under provincial legislation for use in civil cases, by the type of apparatus so authorized and in accordance with the requirements of the provincial legislation.
<br>
 
{{Removed|(2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9)}}
{{Removed|(2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9)}}
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
Line 18: Line 20:
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 243.
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 243.
{{Annotation}}
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
|{{CCCSec2|540}}
|{{NoteUp|540|1}}
|{{NoteUp|540|1}}
|{{terms-
| [[Definitions_of_Parties,_Persons,_Places_and_Organizations#Accused_or_Offender|"accused" (s. 2)]]
| [[Definition_of_Judicial_Officers_and_Offices#.22Justice.22|"justice" (s. 2)]]
}}
}}
}}


Line 29: Line 35:
<ref>
<ref>
See
See
{{CanLIIR|Arcuri|51xv|2001 SCC 54 (CanLII)|[2001] 2 SCR 828}}{{perSCC|McLachlin CJ}}<br>  
{{CanLIIRP|Arcuri|51xv|2001 SCC 54 (CanLII)|[2001] 2 SCR 828}}{{perSCC-H|McLachlin CJ}}<br>  
''United States of America v Shephard'', [1977] 2 SCR 1067, [http://canlii.ca/t/1mx51 1976 CanLII 8] (SCC){{perSCC|Ritchie J}} <br>
{{CanLIIRPC|United States of America v Shephard|1mx51|1976 CanLII 8 (SCC)|[1977] 2 SCR 1067}}{{perSCC|Ritchie J}} <br>
''Mezzo v R'', [1986] 1 SCR 802, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftrq 1986 CanLII 16] (SCC){{Plurality}} <br>
{{CanLIIRPC|Mezzo v R|1ftrq|1986 CanLII 16 (SCC)|[1986] 1 SCR 802}}{{Plurality}} <br>
''Dubois v The Queen'', [1986] 1 SCR 366, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftsx 1986 CanLII 60] (SCC){{perSCC|Estey J}} <br>
{{CanLIIRPC|Dubois v The Queen|1ftsx|1986 CanLII 60 (SCC)|[1986] 1 SCR 366}}{{perSCC|Estey J}} <br>
{{CanLIIRP|Charemski|1fqtc|1998 CanLII 819 (SCC)|, [1998] 1 SCR 679}}{{perSCC|Bastarache J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Charemski|1fqtc|1998 CanLII 819 (SCC)|[1998] 1 SCR 679}}{{perSCC-H|Bastarache J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Monteleone|1ftl9|1987 CanLII 16 (SCC)|, [1987] 2 SCR 154}}{{perSCC|McIntyre J}}</ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Monteleone|1ftl9|1987 CanLII 16 (SCC)|[1987] 2 SCR 154}}{{perSCC-H|McIntyre J}}</ref>


Where direct evidence on each element of an offence is presented, the court must order the accused to stand trial on the charge. Exculpatory evidence will not result in a discharge of the charges.
Where direct evidence on each element of an offence is presented, the court must order the accused to stand trial on the charge. Exculpatory evidence will not result in a discharge of the charges.


The judge may not exclude evidence at the inquiry due to any constitutional violations.<ref>
The judge may not exclude evidence at the inquiry due to any constitutional violations.<ref>
See, {{CanLIIRP|R(L)|231v6|1995 CanLII 8928 (ON CA)| (1995), 28 C.R.R. (2d) 173}}{{perONCA|Arbour JA}}{{atp|183}}<br>  
See, {{CanLIIRP|R(L)|231v6|1995 CanLII 8928 (ON CA)| (1995), 28 CRR (2d) 173}}{{perONCA|Arbour JA}}{{atp|183}}<br>  
also {{CanLIIRP|Mills|1cxmx|1986 CanLII 17 (SCC)|, 26 CCC (3d) 481}}{{perSCC|McIntyre J}}<br>  
also {{CanLIIRP|Mills|1cxmx|1986 CanLII 17 (SCC)|26 CCC (3d) 481}}{{perSCC-H|McIntyre J}}<br>  
{{CanLIIRP|Seaboyer|1fskf|1991 CanLII 76 (SCC)|, 66 CCC (3d) 321}}{{perSCC|McLachlin J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Seaboyer|1fskf|1991 CanLII 76 (SCC)|66 CCC (3d) 321}}{{perSCC-H|McLachlin J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Hynes|51xk|2001 SCC 82 (CanLII)|, [2001] 3 SCR 623, (2001), 159 CCC (3d) 359 (SCC)}}{{perSCC|McLachlin CJ}}{{atsL|51xk|28|, 32}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Hynes|51xk|2001 SCC 82 (CanLII)|[2001] 3 SCR 623, 159 CCC (3d) 359}}{{perSCC-H|McLachlin CJ}}{{atsL|51xk|28|, 32}}<br>
</ref>
</ref>


Line 48: Line 54:
<ref>
<ref>
{{supra1|Hynes}}{{atsL|51xk|33|}} and {{atsL-np|51xk|38|}}<br>
{{supra1|Hynes}}{{atsL|51xk|33|}} and {{atsL-np|51xk|38|}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Chew|g1c4k|1967 CanLII 214 (ON CA)|, [1968] 2 CCC 127 , [1968] 1 O.R. 97, 1967 CLB 46 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Aylesworth JA}}
{{CanLIIRP|Chew|g1c4k|1967 CanLII 214 (ON CA)|[1968] 2 CCC 127 , [1968] 1 OR 97, 1967 CLB 46}}{{perONCA|Aylesworth JA}}
</ref>
</ref>


Line 56: Line 62:
; Expert Evidence
; Expert Evidence
It is an error of jurisdiction by the preliminary inquiry judge to refuse to consider the "sufficiency of the foundation" of the expert evidence.<ref>
It is an error of jurisdiction by the preliminary inquiry judge to refuse to consider the "sufficiency of the foundation" of the expert evidence.<ref>
{{CanLIIR|King|fkzkm|2011 ABQB 162 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Strekaf J}}
{{CanLIIRP|King|fkzkm|2011 ABQB 162 (CanLII)|276 CCC (3d) 371}}{{perABQB|Strekaf J}}
</ref>
</ref>


; Crown Evidence
; Crown Evidence
The Crown has unfettered discretion on whom they wish to call as witnesses. A judge has no authority to direct the Crown to call witnesses.<ref>
The Crown has unfettered discretion on whom they wish to call as witnesses. A judge has no authority to direct the Crown to call witnesses.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Brass|g7s8h|1981 CanLII 2366 (SK QB)|, 64 CCC (2d) 206 (Sask. Q.B.)}}{{perSKQB|Kindred J}}
{{CanLIIRP|Brass|g7s8h|1981 CanLII 2366 (SKQB)|64 CCC (2d) 206 (Sask. Q.B.)}}{{perSKQB|Kindred J}}
</ref>
</ref>


Line 68: Line 74:
===Relevancy===
===Relevancy===
Given the discovery function of the preliminary inquiry, the defence should be entitled to cross-examine on issues unrelated to committal but related to ultimate issues at trial.<ref>
Given the discovery function of the preliminary inquiry, the defence should be entitled to cross-examine on issues unrelated to committal but related to ultimate issues at trial.<ref>
{{CanLIIR|Al-Amoud|g18ks|1992 CanLII 7600 (ON SC)}}{{perONSC|Then J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Al-Amoud|g18ks|1992 CanLII 7600 (ONSC)|10 OR (3d) 676}}{{perONSC|Then J}}<br>
{{CanLIIR|Kasook|5btq|2000 NWTSC 33 (CanLII)}}{{perNWTSC|Vertes J}} - defence permitted to re-open case for inquiry judge refusing to allow defence to test relevant evidence<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Kasook|5btq|2000 NWTSC 33 (CanLII)|2 WWR 683}}{{perNWTSC|Vertes J}} - defence permitted to re-open case for inquiry judge refusing to allow defence to test relevant evidence<br>
</ref>
</ref>


{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
===Depositions===
===Depositions===
{{quotation2|
{{quotation2|
540<Br>...<Br>
540<br>
{{removed|(1)}}
; Reading and signing depositions
; Reading and signing depositions
(2) Where a deposition is taken down in writing, the justice shall, in the presence of the accused, before asking the accused if he wishes to call witnesses,
(2) Where a deposition is taken down in writing, the justice shall, in the presence of the accused, before asking the accused if he wishes to call witnesses,
Line 85: Line 93:
:(a) at the end of each deposition; or
:(a) at the end of each deposition; or
:(b) at the end of several or of all the depositions in a manner that will indicate that his signature is intended to authenticate each deposition.
:(b) at the end of several or of all the depositions in a manner that will indicate that his signature is intended to authenticate each deposition.
...<br>
{{removed|(4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9)}}
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;  
Line 92: Line 100:
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 243.
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 243.
{{Annotation}}
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
|{{CCCSec2|540}}
|{{NoteUp|540|2|3}}
|{{NoteUp|540|2|3}}
}}
}}


===Defence Concessions at Preliminary Inquiry===
===Defence Concessions at Preliminary Inquiry===
Any concessions or waiver of voir dires made at preliminary inquiry stage are irrelevant and have no binding effect upon counsel at trial.<ref>
Any concessions or waiver of voir dires made at the preliminary inquiry stage are irrelevant and have no binding effect upon counsel at trial.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Al-Amoud|g18ks|1992 CanLII 7600 (ON SC)|, }}{{perONSC|Then J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Al-Amoud|g18ks|1992 CanLII 7600 (ONSC)|10 OR (3d) 676}}{{perONSC|Then J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Cover|g9mzc|1988 CanLII 7118 (ON SC)| (1988), 40 C.R.R. 381, 44 CCC (3d) 34 (Ont. H.C.J.)}}{{perONSC|Campbell J}}{{atps|383-84}} ("It is irrelevant that a voir dire was waived at the preliminary. Notwithstanding any waiver of a voir dire, the accused still retains the right to test the Crown's case and pin down witnesses on areas that might be relevant at trial")<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Cover|g9mzc|1988 CanLII 7118 (ONSC)| (1988), 40 CRR 381, 44 CCC (3d) 34}}{{perONSC|Campbell J}}{{atps|383-84}} ("It is irrelevant that a voir dire was waived at the preliminary. Notwithstanding any waiver of a voir dire, the accused still retains the right to test the Crown's case and pin down witnesses on areas that might be relevant at trial")<br>
</ref>
</ref>


Line 110: Line 118:


A preliminary inquiry judge may not rely entirely on a circumstantial case by making inferences.<ref>
A preliminary inquiry judge may not rely entirely on a circumstantial case by making inferences.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Herman|g7v6d|1984 CanLII 2664 (SK CA)|, [1984] S.J. No. 206, (1984), 30 Sask.R. 148, (1984), 11 CCC (3d) 102}}{{perSKCA|Campbell JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Herman|g7v6d|1984 CanLII 2664 (SK CA)|[1984] S.J. No 206, (1984), 30 Sask.R. 148, 11 CCC (3d) 102}}{{perSKCA|Campbell JA}}<br>
cf. {{CanLIIR-N|Coke|, [1996] OJ No 808}}{{perONSC|Hill J}}{{at-|9}}<br>
cf. {{CanLIIR-N|Coke|, [1996] OJ No 808}}{{perONSC|Hill J}}{{at-|9}}<br>
</ref>
</ref>
Line 118: Line 126:
</ref>  
</ref>  
If the justice "does not consider the competing inferences in a manner that gives the maximum reasonable benefit to the Crown, the case law characterizes this as the justice exceeding his or her jurisdiction."<ref>  
If the justice "does not consider the competing inferences in a manner that gives the maximum reasonable benefit to the Crown, the case law characterizes this as the justice exceeding his or her jurisdiction."<ref>  
{{CanLIIR|Corazza|fzzxk|2013 ONCJ 433 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Reinhardt J}} {{atL|fzzxk|93}}
{{CanLIIRx|Corazza|fzzxk|2013 ONCJ 433 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Reinhardt J}} {{atL|fzzxk|93}}
</ref>
</ref>


Line 125: Line 133:
==Admissions or Confessions==
==Admissions or Confessions==
Confessions, admissions or statements of the accused are admissible under the same test to be applied at trial.<ref>
Confessions, admissions or statements of the accused are admissible under the same test to be applied at trial.<ref>
See, {{CanLIIRP|Pickett|htvx8|1975 CanLII 1428 (ON CA)|, 28 CCC (2d) 297 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Jessup JA}}{{atp|303}}</ref>
See, {{CanLIIRP|Pickett|htvx8|1975 CanLII 1428 (ON CA)|28 CCC (2d) 297}}{{perONCA|Jessup JA}}{{atp|303}}</ref>
Thus the crown must advance some evidence that the statement was made and to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it was voluntary.<ref>
Thus the crown must advance some evidence that the statement was made and to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it was voluntary.<ref>
For example, {{CanLIIRP|Mulligan|g1d01|1955 CanLII 124 (ON CA)|, 111 CCC 173 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|MacKay JA}}{{atps|176-7}}<br>  
For example, {{CanLIIRP|Mulligan|g1d01|1955 CanLII 124 (ON CA)|111 CCC 173}}{{perONCA|MacKay JA}}{{atps|176-7}}<br>  
{{supra1|Pickett}}{{atp|302}}
{{supra1|Pickett}}{{atp|302}}
</ref>
</ref>
Line 144: Line 152:


The judge must inquire into whether a self-represented accused has any witnesses to call as evidence.<ref>
The judge must inquire into whether a self-represented accused has any witnesses to call as evidence.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|LeBlanc|273wl|2009 NBCA 84 (CanLII)|, 250 CCC (3d) 29}}{{perNBCA|Richard JA}} (3:0)</ref>
{{CanLIIRP|LeBlanc|273wl|2009 NBCA 84 (CanLII)|250 CCC (3d) 29}}{{perNBCA|Richard JA}} (3:0)</ref>


[{{CCCSec|657}} Section 657] permits any statement made under s. 541(3) to be admitted into evidence against the accused without proof of a judge's signature upon the statement.
[{{CCCSec|657}} Section 657] permits any statement made under s. 541(3) to be admitted into evidence against the accused without proof of a judge's signature upon the statement.
Line 171: Line 179:
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 244.
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 244.
{{Annotation}}
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|541}} CCC]
|{{CCCSec2|541}}
|{{NoteUp|541|1|2|3|4|5}}
|{{NoteUp|541|1|2|3|4|5}}
}}
}}
Line 191: Line 199:
{{LegHistory00s|2005, c. 32}}, s. 19.
{{LegHistory00s|2005, c. 32}}, s. 19.
{{Annotation}}
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|542}} CCC]
|{{CCCSec2|542}}
|{{NoteUp|542|1|2}}
|{{NoteUp|542|1|2}}
}}
}}
Line 197: Line 205:
; No Right to Prevent Defence from Calling Witnesses
; No Right to Prevent Defence from Calling Witnesses
The inquiry judge has no ability to stop defence from calling relevant evidence even where they are satisfied that there is sufficient evidence for committal.<ref>
The inquiry judge has no ability to stop defence from calling relevant evidence even where they are satisfied that there is sufficient evidence for committal.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Ward|hv13n|1976 CanLII 1335 (ON SC)| (1976), 31 CCC (2d) 466}}{{perONSC|Cory J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Ward|hv13n|1976 CanLII 1335 (ONSC)|31 CCC (2d) 466}}{{perONSC|Cory J}}<br>
</ref>
</ref>


Line 212: Line 220:
{{LegHistory90s|1994, c. 44}}, s. 62.
{{LegHistory90s|1994, c. 44}}, s. 62.
{{Annotation}}
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|657}} CCC]
|{{CCCSec2|657}}
|{{NoteUp|657}}
|{{NoteUp|657}}
}}
}}
Line 219: Line 227:


==Hearsay Evidence==
==Hearsay Evidence==
Hearsay evidence, such as prior statement of a witness, may be admitted for the truth of its contents under s. 540(7). However, notice must be given under s. 540(8) and may still be subject to the justice ordering the calling of the witness under s. 540(9).
* [[Admission of Hearsay Evidence at Preliminary Inquiry]]
 
{{quotation2|
540<br>
{{removed|(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6)}}
; Evidence
(7) A justice acting under this Part may receive as evidence any information that would not otherwise be admissible but that the justice considers credible or trustworthy in the circumstances of the case, including a statement that is made by a witness in writing or otherwise recorded.
<br>
{{removed|(8) and (9)}}
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;
{{LegHistory90s|1997, c. 18}}, s. 65;
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 29.
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
|{{NoteUp|540|7}}
}}
 
A verbal utterance recorded by a police officer in his notebook is not a"statement" that is "in writing" as required by s. 540(7).<ref>
{{CanLIIR|McCormick|1jrfz|2005 ONCJ 28 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Dobney J}}
</ref>
 
; Officer Testifying
There is some division between whether reliance upon s. 540(7) requires that the Crown call the investigating officer to testify to the hearsay statements and be subject to cross-examination on the context and continuity of the statements.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Trac et al.|1jlfz|2004 ONCJ 370 (CanLII)|, }}{{perONCJ|Shaw J}}<br>
cf. {{CanLIIR|Rao|frsf5|2012 BCCA 275 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Prowse JA}}<br>
</ref>
 
; Purpose
The purposes of s. 540(7) have been stated as including:<ref>
{{CanLIIR|Panfilova|h2s73|2017 ONCJ 188 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Rose J}}{{atL|h2s73|9}}<br>
</ref>
* streamlining preliminary inquiry hearings;
* focusing issues on a preliminary inquiry given that preliminary inquiry does not consider findings of credibility;
* to spare witnesses and victims of the trauma of having to testify twice;
* striking balance between protecting witnesses and allowing the case to be met; and
* providing the Crown with additional, alternative methods of presenting its case at preliminary inquiry.
 
Crown counsel is encouraged to use s. 540(7) particularly in light of the new need to bring a matter to trial with the presumptive ceilings.<ref>
{{ibid1|Panfilova}}{{atL|h2s73|12}}<br>
</ref>
 
; Burden
The onus is upon the party adducing the records to show that:<ref>
{{CanLIIR|DB|gnkzl|2016 MBPC 11 (CanLII)}}{{perMBPC|Rolston J}}{{atL|gnkzl|17}}<Br>
</ref>
# the evidence should be received under s. 540(7) and
# the evidence is "credible and trustworthy".
 
; Standard of Proof
The standard of proof is one of balance of probabilities.<ref>
{{CanLIIR|JMC|gn6lp|2015 MBPC 38 (CanLII)}}{{perMBPC|Champagne J}}{{atL|gn6lp|42}}<br>
</ref>
 
; "Credible and Trustworthy"
For a statement to be "credible and trustworthy" the evidence must have an air of reliability.<ref>
{{supra1|McCormick}}</ref>
 
The application of the test will vary on a "case by case" basis.<ref>
{{supra1|JMC}}{{atL|gn6lp|42}}<br>
</ref>
 
"Credibility" does not have the same meaning as it would in a trial. It is more akin to the test for admissibility on bail hearings, sentencing hearings or extradition hearings.<ref>
{{supra1|Panfilova}}{{atL|h2s73|9}}<br>
{{CanLIIR|Trac|1jlfz|2004 ONCJ 370 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Shaw J}}<Br>
</ref>
 
Where the ultimate issue of trial concerns credibility, the witness should usually be called.<ref>
{{supra1|McCormick}}</ref>
 
The standard means only a "prima facie" case.<ref>
{{CanLIIR|Rao|frsf5|2012 BCCA 275 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Prowse JA}} (2:1){{atL|frsf5|72}}<!-- ??? --><br>
</ref>
 
The determination of "credible and trustworthy" requires "some belief, based upon an objective standard of reason and commonsense".<ref>
{{CanLIIR|Uttak|1nh51|2006 NUCJ 10 (CanLII)}}{{perNUCJ|Kilpatrick J}}{{AtsL|1nh51|12| and 13}}<br>
</ref>
If the evidence "might reasonably be true", then it is credible and admissible.<ref>
{{ibid1|Uttak}}{{atL|1nh51|12}}<br>
</ref>
 
Observations that "appear to be irrational...or... lack any objective basis in fact" are not sufficient to be credible.<ref>
{{ibid1|Uttak}}{{atL|1nh51|12}}<br>
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
===Leave for Cross-examination===
 
{{quotation2|
540<br>
{{removed|(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (8)}}
; Appearance for examination
(9) The justice shall, on application of a party, require any person whom the justice considers appropriate to appear for examination or cross-examination with respect to information intended to be tendered as evidence under subsection (7) {{AnnSec5|540(7)}}.
<br>
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;
{{LegHistory90s|1997, c. 18}}, s. 65;
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 29.
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
|{{NoteUp|540|9}}
}}
 
The choice to allow counsel to cross-examine a witness under s. 540(9) is a discretionary one permitted for purposes beyond testing "credibility or trustworthiness".<ref>
{{CanLIIR|dCatellier|gvnm4|2016 MBQB 190 (CanLII)}}{{perMBQB|McKelvey J}}{{atsL|gvnm4|86| to 92}}<Br>
{{CanLIIR|Sweet|fs6wt|2012 YKSC 37 (CanLII)}}{{perYKSC|Nation J}}{{atL|fs6wt|32}} (“Cross-examination under this section is not limited to the purpose of determining whether the evidence is credible and trustworthy enough to be admitted pursuant to s. 540(7).”)<br>
</ref>
 
The justice should consider the "accused's legitimate interest in preparing his or her defence and bringing out, at preliminary hearing stage, the insufficiency or the weakness of the Crown’s evidence" and weigh against whether "the cross-examination requested by the accused is relevant to the particular situation of the person whose appearance is requested and to all of the circumstances of the case".<ref>
''R v M(P)'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1sqch 2007 QCCA 414] (CanLII){{perQCCA|Rochette JA}}<br>
</ref>
 
If the applicant cannot show relevance then the request should be denied.<ref>
{{ibid1|M(P)}}
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}
 
===Notice===
Notice of intention to adduce hearsay evidence must be given to all counsel to the proceedings.
{{quotation2|
540<br>
{{removed|(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7)}}
; Notice of intention to tender
(8) Unless the justice orders otherwise, no information may be received as evidence under subsection (7) {{AnnSec5|540(7)}} unless the party has given to each of the other parties reasonable notice of his or her intention to tender it, together with a copy of the statement, if any, referred to in that subsection.
<br>
{{removed|(9)}}
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;
{{LegHistory90s|1997, c. 18}}, s. 65;
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 29.
{{Annotation}}
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
|{{NoteUp|540|8}}
}}
 
To admit a transcript of a wiretap interception, there is no requirement to comply with s. 189(5) notice.<ref>
''LeBlanc and Steeves v R'', [http://canlii.ca/t/273wl 2009 NBCA 84] (CanLII){{perNBCA|Richard JA}}
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}


==Recording of Evidence and Transcription==
==Recording of Evidence and Transcription==
Line 363: Line 233:
{{quotation2|
{{quotation2|
; Taking evidence
; Taking evidence
540 (1) ...
540 <br>
<br>
{{removed|(1), (2) and (3)}}
; Stenographer to be sworn
; Stenographer to be sworn
(4) Where the stenographer appointed to take down the evidence is not a duly sworn court stenographer, he shall make oath that he will truly and faithfully report the evidence.
(4) Where the stenographer appointed to take down the evidence is not a duly sworn court stenographer, he shall make oath that he will truly and faithfully report the evidence.
Line 373: Line 243:
:(b) a certificate that it is a true report of the evidence if the stenographer is a duly sworn court stenographer.
:(b) a certificate that it is a true report of the evidence if the stenographer is a duly sworn court stenographer.
; Transcription of record taken by sound recording apparatus
; Transcription of record taken by sound recording apparatus
(6) Where, in accordance with this Act, a record is taken in any proceedings under this Act by a sound recording apparatus, the record so taken shall, on request of the justice or of one of the parties, be dealt with and transcribed, in whole or in part, and the transcription certified and used in accordance with the provincial legislation, with such modifications as the circumstances require mentioned in subsection (1) {{AnnSec5|540(1)}}.
(6) Where, in accordance with this Act, a record is taken in any proceedings under this Act by a sound recording apparatus, the record so taken shall, on request of the justice or of one of the parties, be dealt with and transcribed, in whole or in part, and the transcription certified and used in accordance with the provincial legislation, with such modifications as the circumstances require mentioned in subsection (1) {{AnnSec5|540(1)}}.<br>
<br>
{{removed|(7), (8) and (9)}}
...<Br>
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 540;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;  
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 98;  
{{LegHistory90s|1997, c. 18}}, s. 65;  
{{LegHistory90s|1997, c. 18}}, s. 65;  
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 29.
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 29;
|[{{CCCSec|540}} CCC]
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 243.
|{{CCCSec2|540}}
|{{NoteUp|540|4|5|6}}
|{{NoteUp|540|4|5|6}}
}}
}}
Retrieved from "https://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php/Preliminary_Inquiry_Evidence"