Hearsay (Cases): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([a-zA-Z]+)\'\', \[http\:\/\/canlii\.ca\/t\/([a-zA-Z0-9_]+) ([1-2][0-9]{3} [BASMOQNP][CBKNCSL][A-Z]+ [0-9]+)\] \(CanLII\)\{" to "{{CanLIIR|$1|$2|$3 (CanLII)}}{" |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
| ''R v Sigovin''<br> [2006] OJ No 1967 (Ont. Ct. Jus.){{NOCANLII}}||admitted|| | | ''R v Sigovin''<br> [2006] OJ No 1967 (Ont. Ct. Jus.){{NOCANLII}}||admitted|| | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|White|1q4pf|2006 ABQB 888 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Moreau J}} || dismissed|| | ||
|- | |- | ||
| R v Adam et al, [http://canlii.ca/t/1p876 2006 BCSC 1355] (CanLII){{perBCSC|Romilly J}} |||| | | R v Adam et al, [http://canlii.ca/t/1p876 2006 BCSC 1355] (CanLII){{perBCSC|Romilly J}} |||| | ||
Line 207: | Line 207: | ||
! Case Name !! Summary | ! Case Name !! Summary | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|CM|fr983|2012 ABPC 102 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Franklin J}} || witness gave preliminary inquiry testimony, later said that it was all a lie--prior statement admitted | ||
|- | |- | ||
| R v McCormack ''et al.'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1z16w 2008 ONCJ 286] (CanLII){{perONCJ|Beatty J}} || prior written statement evidence partially admitted | | R v McCormack ''et al.'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1z16w 2008 ONCJ 286] (CanLII){{perONCJ|Beatty J}} || prior written statement evidence partially admitted | ||
Line 213: | Line 213: | ||
| ''R v Tomlinson'', [http://canlii.ca/t/21j01 2008 CanLII 58424] (ONSC){{perONSC|Archibald J}} || oral utterance to police; inadmissible | | ''R v Tomlinson'', [http://canlii.ca/t/21j01 2008 CanLII 58424] (ONSC){{perONSC|Archibald J}} || oral utterance to police; inadmissible | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Devine|1qtfp|2007 ABCA 49 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (2:1) || girlfriend keeps changing story; ID evidence admitted | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Rombough|1sgk0|2006 ABPC 262 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Kerby J}} || video statement admitted | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Nejad|1p370|2004 BCSC 1819 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC|Truscott J}} || statement to police admitted | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Duong'', [http://canlii.ca/t/6gmb 1998 CanLII 3585] (ON C.A.){{TheCourtONCA}} || reject prior testimony of co-accused placing accused at scene; witness proven liar | | ''R v Duong'', [http://canlii.ca/t/6gmb 1998 CanLII 3585] (ON C.A.){{TheCourtONCA}} || reject prior testimony of co-accused placing accused at scene; witness proven liar | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Hrynyk|4pjh|1998 ABPC 160 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Ketchum J}} || under oath statement admitted | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 231: | Line 231: | ||
| ''R v Thomas (R.J.)'', [http://canlii.ca/t/25jsf 2009 MBCA 85] (CanLII){{perMBCA|Monnin JA}} ||"forgetful" witness gave video statement; admitted. | | ''R v Thomas (R.J.)'', [http://canlii.ca/t/25jsf 2009 MBCA 85] (CanLII){{perMBCA|Monnin JA}} ||"forgetful" witness gave video statement; admitted. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Woodard|23cvr|2009 MBCA 42 (CanLII)}}{{perMBCA|Chartier JA}} || "forgetful" witness; prior statement admissible | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|EC|1sr4m|2007 SKPC 27 (CanLII)}}{{perSKPC|Gray J}} || witness "forgets"; prior statement admissible | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Moreau'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1nbhg 2006 NUCJ 8] (CanLII){{perNUCJ|Kilpatrick J}} || prior statement not admitted | | ''R v Moreau'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1nbhg 2006 NUCJ 8] (CanLII){{perNUCJ|Kilpatrick J}} || prior statement not admitted | ||
Line 249: | Line 249: | ||
| R v U. (S.), [http://canlii.ca/t/1svv5 2007 NUCJ 20] (CanLII){{perNUCJ|Johnson J}} || statement admitted | | R v U. (S.), [http://canlii.ca/t/1svv5 2007 NUCJ 20] (CanLII){{perNUCJ|Johnson J}} || statement admitted | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Goodstoney|1jvpb|2005 ABQB 128 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Rooke J}} || 2 out of 3 KGB statements rejected | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |{{CanLIIR|Scott|1jddq|2004 NSCA 141 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Fichaud JA}} || KGB statement wrongly admitted in [http://canlii.ca/t/1gmnh 2004 NSSC 13] (CanLII) | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Charles'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1mcrn 1997 CanLII 9699] (SKCA){{perSKCA|Cameron JA}} || 3 prior statements inadmissible | | ''R v Charles'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1mcrn 1997 CanLII 9699] (SKCA){{perSKCA|Cameron JA}} || 3 prior statements inadmissible | ||
Line 275: | Line 275: | ||
! Case Name !! Summary | ! Case Name !! Summary | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Clark|1z3vs|2008 ABQB 384 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Lee J}} || missing witness; PI testimony admissible | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Lewis'', [http://canlii.ca/t/5dc1 2003 NSPC 3] (CanLII){{perNSPC|C Williams J}} || witness gave 2 statements, was available but failed to attend court; statement inadmissible | | ''R v Lewis'', [http://canlii.ca/t/5dc1 2003 NSPC 3] (CanLII){{perNSPC|C Williams J}} || witness gave 2 statements, was available but failed to attend court; statement inadmissible | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|May|frjqj|2012 BCSC 802 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC|Williams J}} || admissible - Preliminary Inquiry transcript | ||
|} | |} | ||
===Confession=== | ===Confession=== | ||
Line 286: | Line 286: | ||
! Case Name !! Summary | ! Case Name !! Summary | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Edgar|2br4d|2010 ONCA 529 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Sharpe JA}} || prior statements admitted | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Misc== | ==Misc== | ||
Line 300: | Line 300: | ||
! Case Name !! Summary | ! Case Name !! Summary | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Abel|fq2cl|2011 NLTD 173 (CanLII)}}{{perNLSC|Stack J}} || hearsay evidence of murder victim reporting multiple incidents of violence to family was inadmissible under principled approach | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Pasqualino|1zg5v|2008 ONCA 554 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|LaForme JA}} || admitted for est. motive, intent and animus -- statement of victim reporting past physical and verbal abuse. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Moo|25kzl|2009 ONCA 645 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Watt JA}} || statement by deceased reporting nature of relationship and marriage -- admitted for 1) motive, intent, and animus 2) rebut accused claim of unintentional killing and 3) credibility if accused testifies | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Candir|2754x|2009 ONCA 915 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Watt JA}} ||150 statements of deceased to show state of mind -- admitted for motive, animus and identity of killer and state of mind of killer (para 51) | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Polimac|29plv|2010 ONCA 346 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Doherty JA}}|| admitted to establish motive in domestic homicide | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Bari|1q41l|2006 NBCA 119 (CanLII)}}{{perNBCA|Deschênes JA}} || admissible to show victim's fear / state of mind | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Van Osselaer'', [http://canlii.ca/t/58kj 2002 BCCA 464] (CanLII){{perBCCA|Hall JA}} || admissible to show nature of relationship bw accused and deceased, show motive and identity of killer, shows intent, rebut defence of accident, narrative | | ''R v Van Osselaer'', [http://canlii.ca/t/58kj 2002 BCCA 464] (CanLII){{perBCCA|Hall JA}} || admissible to show nature of relationship bw accused and deceased, show motive and identity of killer, shows intent, rebut defence of accident, narrative | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | {{CanLIIR|Misir|1fn6n|2001 BCCA 202 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Proudfoot JA}} || admitted to prove intent, motive and identity, and relationship between the parties | ||
|- | |- | ||
| ''R v Nickerson'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1h36w 1996 CanLII 3664] (NS SC), [1996] NSJ No. 342{{perNSSC|Haliburton J}} || 3 witnesses recanted, saying they forgot, were intoxicated at time, were misunderstood by police--court admitted prior statements--reliability found based on separate and corroborating statements, the witnesses understood need for truth, and it was accurately recorded | | ''R v Nickerson'', [http://canlii.ca/t/1h36w 1996 CanLII 3664] (NS SC), [1996] NSJ No. 342{{perNSSC|Haliburton J}} || 3 witnesses recanted, saying they forgot, were intoxicated at time, were misunderstood by police--court admitted prior statements--reliability found based on separate and corroborating statements, the witnesses understood need for truth, and it was accurately recorded | ||
|} | |} |
Revision as of 17:55, 27 January 2021
Categorical Exceptions
State of Mind
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Wysochan 1930 CanLII 483 (SK CA), (1930) 54 CCC 172 (SKCA), per Haultain CJ |
"there's a bullet in my body" -- admitted |
R v Edwards (1994), 1994 CanLII 1461 (ON CA), 91 CCC (3d) 123 (ONCA), per McKinlay JA | cell phone messages suggestive of trafficking -- admitted for purpose of establishing the activities of accused and intent to respond. |
Res Gestae
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Keewatin, 2013 ABPC 1 (CanLII), per Sully J |
rejected |
R v Villeda, 2011 ABCA 85 (CanLII), per curiam |
complainant's 911 call admitted in evidence as res gestae hearsay dispite issues with impairment |
R v Khan, 2010 ONCJ 580 (CanLII), per Schwarzl J |
complainant's 911 call admissible for prosecution as res gestae |
Statutory
Case Name | Result | Summary |
---|---|---|
R v Alcantara, 2012 ABQB 219 (CanLII), per Greckol J |
prelim evidence was admitted under s. 715 | |
R v Beah, 2013 ONSC 2490 (CanLII), per Strathy J |
application under .715(1)(d) granted |
Principled Exception to Hearsay
General
Case Name | Result | Summary |
---|---|---|
R v Frederickson, 2013 BCSC 779 (CanLII), per Grist J |
rejected in part | |
R v Clarke, 2013 MBQB 26 (CanLII), per Saull J |
admitted | |
R v House, 2012 ONSC 6749 (CanLII), per Broad J |
rejected (agreed stmt) admitted (interview) |
|
R v Serre 2012 ONSC 3210 (CanLII), per Aitken J |
admitted | guilty plea and agreed statement of facts of a co-accused are admitted only as far as it covers first-hand knowledge. |
R v Deelespp, 2002 ABPC 85 (CanLII), per Allen J |
admitted | |
R v Agwa and Ojulu, 2011 MBPC 21 (CanLII), per Elliott J |
admitted | |
R v Sasakamoose, 2008 SKPC 164 (CanLII), per Kolenick J |
rejected | |
R v EC, 2007 SKPC 27 (CanLII), per Gray J |
||
R v KPH, 2007 ABQB 728 (CanLII), per Thomas J |
||
R v Kontzamanis, 2007 BCSC 1603 (CanLII), per Dillon J |
dismissed | |
R v Williams, 2006 NSCA 23 (CanLII), [2006] NSJ No. 63 (NSCA), per Oland JA |
||
R v Sigovin [2006] OJ No 1967 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) |
admitted | |
R v White, 2006 ABQB 888 (CanLII), per Moreau J | dismissed | |
R v Adam et al, 2006 BCSC 1355 (CanLII), per Romilly J | ||
R v Aronis, 2005 CanLII 2057 (ON SC), [2005] OJ No 286 (Ont. S.C.), per Howden J | ||
R v Beckmann, 2005 ABQB 227 (CanLII), [2005] AJ No 385 (Alta. QB), per Lee J | ||
R v Levesque [2004] OJ No 2528 (Ont. S.C.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v AM, 2004 ONCJ 185 (CanLII), [2004] O.J. No 3770 (Ont. S.C.), per Hackett J | ||
R v Johnson, 2004 NSCA 91 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 280 (NSCA), per Oland JA | ||
R v Michaud, 2004 CanLII 7714 (ON CA), [2004] OJ No 2098, (Ont. C.A.), per curiam | ||
R v PSB, 2004 NSCA 25 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 49 (NSCA), per Cromwell JA | ||
R v Singh [2004] OJ No 1799 (Ont. Ct. Jus)(*no CanLII links) | admitted | Domestic offence |
R v Scott, 2004 NSCA 141 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 451 (NSCA), per Fichaud JA | ||
R v Malik, 2004 BCSC 299 (CanLII), [2004] BCJ No. 456 (BCSC), per Josephson J | ||
R v Morehouse, 2004 ABQB 97 (CanLII), [2004] AJ No 123 (Alta. Q.B.), per Rooke J | ||
R v Strauss, 2004 SKPC 146 (CanLII), [2004] S.J. No. 846 (Sask. Prov. Ct.), per Carter J | ||
R v Wodage [2004] M.J. No. 61 (Man. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Prince, 2004 BCPC 163 (CanLII), [2004] BCJ No. 1277 (BC. Prov. Ct.), per Brecknell J | ||
R v Czibulka, 2004 CanLII 22985 (ON CA), [2004] OJ No 3273 (Ont. C.A.), per Rosenberg JA | ||
R v Nolin, 2003 CanLII 5923 (MB PC), [2003] M.J. No. 270 (Man. Prov. Ct.), per Sandhu J | ||
R v Wilder, 2003 BCSC 1840 (CanLII), [2003] BCJ No. 2884, per Romilly J | ||
R v Campbell, 2002 NSCA 35 (CanLII), [2002] NSJ No. 120 (NSCA), per Bateman JA | ||
R v Nazareth [2002] OJ No 4085 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Nejad, 2002 BCPC 617 (CanLII), [2002] BCJ No. 3067 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), per Chen J | statement admitted | domestic violence -- gave different story from handwritten statement--statement consistent with 911 call and other evidence--no duress in statement, written over 45 minutes |
R v EJF, 2001 NSCA 158 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 434 (NSCA), per Bateman JA | ||
R v Oakley, 2001 NSPC 36 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 537 (NS Prov. Ct.), per C Williams J | ||
R v Pennell, 2001 NSPC 12 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 211(NS Prov. Ct.), per C Williams J | ||
R v Nguyen, 2001 ABCA 98 (CanLII), [2001] AJ No 513 (Alta. C.A.), per curiam | ||
R v Glowatski, 2001 BCCA 678 (CanLII), [2001] BCJ No. 2499 (BCCA), per Hall JA | ||
R v Auger, 2001 NWTSC 30 (CanLII), [2001] N.W.T.J. No. 45 (NWT Sup. Ct.), per Schuler J | ||
R v Morrissey [2001] OJ No 498 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Armstrong [2001] OJ No 2348 (Ont. Sup. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v J.M. [2001] OJ No 1748 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Lavallee, 2000 CanLII 19585 (SK PC), [2000] S.J. No. 43 (Sask. Prov. Ct.), per Ebert J | ||
R v Diu, 2000 CanLII 4535 (ON CA), [2000] OJ No 1770 (Ont. C.A.), per Sharpe JA | ||
R v Deschenes [2000] OJ No 4658 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v R.B. [2000] OJ No 1888 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Schwartzenburg [2000] OJ No 2655 (Ont. S.C. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | not admitted | domestic offence |
R v Van Osselaer, 1999 CanLII 5913 (BC SC), 1999 CanLII 6976 (BC SC), [1999] BCJ No. 3140 (BCSC), per MacAulay J | ||
R v St. Croix, 1999 CanLII 19721 (NL SCTD), [1999] N.J. 214 (Nfld. S.C.), per Barry J | ||
R v MacLeod [1999] OJ No 4325(*no CanLII links) | statement admitted | domestic offence--victim claimed at trial it was accident--not under oath or video tapted |
R v Duong [1999] OJ No 1651 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Merz, 1999 CanLII 1647 (ON CA), (1999) 140 CCC (3d) 259 (Ont. C.A.), per Doherty JA | ||
R v Bartlett [1999] OJ No 3313 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | statement admitted | domestic offence--statement given within an hour of incident, detailed and signed--witness agreed contents were reliable to what was said-- |
R v S.H. [1998] O.J. No 613 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Fraser, 1997 CanLII 2562 (NS SC), [1997] NSJ No. 541 (NSSC), per Carver J | ||
R v Conway, 1997 CanLII 2726 (ON CA), (1997) 121 CCC (3d) 397 (Ont C.A.), per Labrosse JA | ||
R v O’Keefe [1997] N.J. No. 314 (Nfld. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Chartrand [1997] M.J. No. 552 (Man. Q.B.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Mohamed [1997] OJ No 1298 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Campbell [1997] OJ No 5837 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v W.B. [1997] OJ No 5382 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | domestic assault, threats--witness gave video statement, left country--admitted statement--corroboration | |
R v Leopold [1996] NSJ No. 544 (NS Prov. Ct)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Pottie, 1996 CanLII 5604 (NS CA), [1996] NSJ No. 138 (NSCA), per Puglsey JA | ||
R v Collins [1996] OJ No 2881 (Ont Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | statement admitted | recanted witness |
R v J.K. [1996] BCJ No. 2751 (B.C.Y.C.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
R v Woycheshen [1996] M.J. No. 570 (Man. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | statement not admitted | |
R v Smart [1995] OJ No 4182 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) |
Deceased witness
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Chretien, 2009 CanLII 9390 (ON SC), per Aitken J |
video statement admitted for truth of contents under KGB |
R v Kociuk, 2009 MBQB 162 (CanLII), per Joyal ACJ |
confession to murder by a deceased third party held admissible |
R v McCotter, 2012 BCCA 54 (CanLII), per Ryan JA |
statements made to co-workers before death admissible |
R v Candir, 2009 ONCA 915 (CanLII), per Watt JA |
admissible |
R v Fairburn, 2009 CanLII 37714 (ONSC), per Poupore J |
admissible |
R v Mohammed, 2007 ONCA 513 (CanLII), per curiam |
admissible |
R v Assoun, 2006 NSCA 47 (CanLII), per curiam |
|
R v Ackland, 2006 ABQB 347 (CanLII), per Germain J |
deceased mother's statement excluded |
R v Solic, 2003 ABQB 1069 (CanLII), per Slatter J |
deceased gave video statement; admissible |
Recanting witness
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v CM, 2012 ABPC 102 (CanLII), per Franklin J | witness gave preliminary inquiry testimony, later said that it was all a lie--prior statement admitted |
R v McCormack et al., 2008 ONCJ 286 (CanLII), per Beatty J | prior written statement evidence partially admitted |
R v Tomlinson, 2008 CanLII 58424 (ONSC), per Archibald J | oral utterance to police; inadmissible |
R v Devine, 2007 ABCA 49 (CanLII), per curiam (2:1) | girlfriend keeps changing story; ID evidence admitted |
R v Rombough, 2006 ABPC 262 (CanLII), per Kerby J | video statement admitted |
R v Nejad, 2004 BCSC 1819 (CanLII), per Truscott J | statement to police admitted |
R v Duong, 1998 CanLII 3585 (ON C.A.), per curiam | reject prior testimony of co-accused placing accused at scene; witness proven liar |
R v Hrynyk, 1998 ABPC 160 (CanLII), per Ketchum J | under oath statement admitted |
Forgetful witnesses
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Thomas (R.J.), 2009 MBCA 85 (CanLII), per Monnin JA | "forgetful" witness gave video statement; admitted. |
R v Woodard, 2009 MBCA 42 (CanLII), per Chartier JA | "forgetful" witness; prior statement admissible |
R v EC, 2007 SKPC 27 (CanLII), per Gray J | witness "forgets"; prior statement admissible |
R v Moreau, 2006 NUCJ 8 (CanLII), per Kilpatrick J | prior statement not admitted |
R v Malik and Bagri, 2004 BCSC 2004 (CanLII), per Josephson J | forgetful witness gave statement; admitted as past recollection recorded |
Refusal to testify
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Cansanay, 2009 MBCA 59 (CanLII), per Monnin JA | gang members refuse to testify; overturn exclusion of statements |
R v U. (S.), 2007 NUCJ 20 (CanLII), per Johnson J | statement admitted |
R v Goodstoney, 2005 ABQB 128 (CanLII), per Rooke J | 2 out of 3 KGB statements rejected |
R v Scott, 2004 NSCA 141 (CanLII), per Fichaud JA | KGB statement wrongly admitted in 2004 NSSC 13 (CanLII) |
R v Charles, 1997 CanLII 9699 (SKCA), per Cameron JA | 3 prior statements inadmissible |
Disabled witness
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Pearson, 1994 CanLII 8751 (BCCA), per Taylor JA |
Youthful witness
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Weselak, 1999 CanLII 14165 (MBQB), per Menzies J | admitted PI testimony of child |
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Clark, 2008 ABQB 384 (CanLII), per Lee J | missing witness; PI testimony admissible |
R v Lewis, 2003 NSPC 3 (CanLII), per C Williams J | witness gave 2 statements, was available but failed to attend court; statement inadmissible |
R v May, 2012 BCSC 802 (CanLII), per Williams J | admissible - Preliminary Inquiry transcript |
Confession
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Edgar, 2010 ONCA 529 (CanLII), per Sharpe JA | prior statements admitted |
Misc
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Singh-Murray, 2011 NBPC 33 (CanLII), per McCarroll J | KGB statement not admissible |
Domestic Violence cases
Case Name | Summary |
---|---|
R v Abel, 2011 NLTD 173 (CanLII), per Stack J | hearsay evidence of murder victim reporting multiple incidents of violence to family was inadmissible under principled approach |
R v Pasqualino, 2008 ONCA 554 (CanLII), per LaForme JA | admitted for est. motive, intent and animus -- statement of victim reporting past physical and verbal abuse. |
R v Moo, 2009 ONCA 645 (CanLII), per Watt JA | statement by deceased reporting nature of relationship and marriage -- admitted for 1) motive, intent, and animus 2) rebut accused claim of unintentional killing and 3) credibility if accused testifies |
R v Candir, 2009 ONCA 915 (CanLII), per Watt JA | 150 statements of deceased to show state of mind -- admitted for motive, animus and identity of killer and state of mind of killer (para 51) |
R v Polimac, 2010 ONCA 346 (CanLII), per Doherty JA | admitted to establish motive in domestic homicide |
R v Bari, 2006 NBCA 119 (CanLII), per Deschênes JA | admissible to show victim's fear / state of mind |
R v Van Osselaer, 2002 BCCA 464 (CanLII), per Hall JA | admissible to show nature of relationship bw accused and deceased, show motive and identity of killer, shows intent, rebut defence of accident, narrative |
R v Misir, 2001 BCCA 202 (CanLII), per Proudfoot JA | admitted to prove intent, motive and identity, and relationship between the parties |
R v Nickerson, 1996 CanLII 3664 (NS SC), [1996] NSJ No. 342, per Haliburton J | 3 witnesses recanted, saying they forgot, were intoxicated at time, were misunderstood by police--court admitted prior statements--reliability found based on separate and corroborating statements, the witnesses understood need for truth, and it was accurately recorded |