Credibility Based on Prior Criminal Record: Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([^\']+)\'\', \[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([^\s]+) ([0-9]{4} [^\s]+ [0-9]+)\] \(([^\)]+\))([^\{]+)\{" to "{{CanLIIRP|$1|$2|$3 ($4|$5}}{" |
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([^\'\']+)\'\'([^\[h]+)\[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([^\s]+) ([0-9]{4} [^\s]+ [0-9]+)\] \(([^\)]+\))\{\{([pT])" to "{{CanLIIRP|$1|$3|$4 ($5|$2}}{{$6" |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
; Types of Convictions | ; Types of Convictions | ||
It is permissible to cross-examination on convictions under any federal legislation<ref> | It is permissible to cross-examination on convictions under any federal legislation<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Watkins|g9jnr|1992 CanLII 12750 (ON CA)|, (1992), 70 CCC (3d) 341 (ONCA), }}{{TheCourtONCA}}</ref>, certain convictions under provincial legislation<ref> | |||
{{CanLIIRP|Green|htxt4|1943 CanLII 404 (BC CA)| (1943) 79 CCC 227 (BCCA), }}{{perBCCA|Fisher JA}}</ref> | |||
, and convictions under foreign legislation where it would constitute an offence in Canada.<ref> | , and convictions under foreign legislation where it would constitute an offence in Canada.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Stratton|g14s2|1978 CanLII 1644 (ON CA)|, (1978), 21 O.R. (2d) 258 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}}<Br> | {{CanLIIRP|Stratton|g14s2|1978 CanLII 1644 (ON CA)|, (1978), 21 O.R. (2d) 258 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}}<Br> | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
; Youth Records | ; Youth Records | ||
It is not permitted to cross-examine a person on their youth criminal record without satisfying the requirements for production of records under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.<ref> | It is not permitted to cross-examine a person on their youth criminal record without satisfying the requirements for production of records under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Sheik-Qasim|1v3jm|2007 CanLII 52983 (ON SC)|, }}{{perONSC|Molloy J}} | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Menard|6hx0|1996 CanLII 685 (ON CA)|, (l996), 108 CCC (3d) 424 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Arbour JA}}{{atps|435-436}} affirmed (l998), 125 CCC (3d) 416 (SCC) at 427-428, 433<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Menard|6hx0|1996 CanLII 685 (ON CA)|, (l996), 108 CCC (3d) 424 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Arbour JA}}{{atps|435-436}} affirmed (l998), 125 CCC (3d) 416 (SCC) at 427-428, 433<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Bricker|6k27|1994 CanLII 630 (ONCA)|, 90 CCC (3d) 268 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Laskin JA}}{{atps|274-279}}<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Bricker|6k27|1994 CanLII 630 (ONCA)|, 90 CCC (3d) 268 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Laskin JA}}{{atps|274-279}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Shortreed|g9c0x|1990 CanLII 10962 (ON CA)| (1990), 54 CCC (3d) 292 (Ont.C.A.), }}{{perONCA|Lacourciere JA}}{{atps|305-307}}<br> | |||
''R v Furrant'', [1983] 1 SCR 124, [http://canlii.ca/t/1xv59 1983 CanLII 118] (SCC), (1983), 4 CCC (3d) 354 (SCC){{perSCC|Dickson J}} at 368-369<br> | ''R v Furrant'', [1983] 1 SCR 124, [http://canlii.ca/t/1xv59 1983 CanLII 118] (SCC), (1983), 4 CCC (3d) 354 (SCC){{perSCC|Dickson J}} at 368-369<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Laurier|g9dlm|1983 CanLII 3507 (ON CA)| (l983), I O.A.C. 128 (Ont.C.A.){{NOCANLII}}{{atp|131}}<br> | |||
''R v Howard and Trudel'' (1983), 3 CCC (3d) 399 (Ont.C.A.), | ''R v Howard and Trudel'' (1983), 3 CCC (3d) 399 (Ont.C.A.), }}{{perONCA|Howland CJ}} at 417<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Lizotte|gdczk|1980 CanLII 2957 (QC CA)| (1980), 61 CCC (2d) 423 (Que.C.A.), }}{{perQCCA|Kaufman JA}}, at 432-434<br> | |||
{{CanLIIRP|Boyce|g18qv|1975 CanLII 569 (ONCA)|, 23 CCC (2d) 16 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}} at 35-37<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Boyce|g18qv|1975 CanLII 569 (ONCA)|, 23 CCC (2d) 16 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}} at 35-37<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|McLaughlin|g16k6|1974 CanLII 748 (ON CA)|, (1974), 20 CCC 59 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Evans JA}} at 60-61<br> | {{CanLIIRP|McLaughlin|g16k6|1974 CanLII 748 (ON CA)|, (1974), 20 CCC 59 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Evans JA}} at 60-61<br> | ||
Revision as of 12:35, 27 February 2021
- < Evidence
- < Credibility
General Principles
Under s. 12(1) of the Canada Criminal Evidence Act, any witness may be questioned on whether they have been convicted of prior offences.[1] The evidence may go to credibility but not to bad character or propensity to commit crimes. It will also be limited where the prejudicial effect outweighs the probative value.[2] The section permits cross-examining any witness on the existence of a criminal record. Defence can cross-examine a crown witness on any details behind their criminal record. The only limitation is relevance to the case before the court.[3]
Section 12 states:
- Examination as to previous convictions
12 (1) A witness may be questioned as to whether the witness has been convicted of any offence, excluding any offence designated as a contravention under the Contraventions Act, but including such an offence where the conviction was entered after a trial on an indictment.
[omitted (1.1) and (2)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 12; 1992, c. 47, s. 66.
- Types of Convictions
It is permissible to cross-examination on convictions under any federal legislation[4], certain convictions under provincial legislation[5] , and convictions under foreign legislation where it would constitute an offence in Canada.[6]
- Outstanding Charges
A charge against any witness cannot be used as evidence against credibility due to the presumption of innocence. He also cannot be cross-examined on outstanding charges.[7] There is a limited exception to this rule.[8]
- Use of Co-Accused Conviction
A jury may not use the conviction of a co-accused for the same charge as evidence towards guilt, rather it may only be used to assess the accused's knowledge and intent.[9]
- Youth Records
It is not permitted to cross-examine a person on their youth criminal record without satisfying the requirements for production of records under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.[10]
- ↑ See s. 12 CEA
- ↑ see Discretionary Exclusion of Evidence
- ↑
R v Davidson (1974) 20 CCC (2d) 292 (ONCA)(*no CanLII links)
, at p. 443
R v Gassyt and Markowitz, 1998 CanLII 5976 (ON CA), , (1998) 127 CCC (3d) 546 (ONCA), per Charron JA, at p. 560
R v Miller, 1998 CanLII 5115 (ON CA), , (1998) 131 CCC (3d) 141 (ONCA), per Charron JA, at p. 147
R v H(BJ), 2000 CanLII 3190 (ON CA), , [2000] OJ No 279 (ONCA), per curiam, at para 2
- ↑ R v Watkins, 1992 CanLII 12750 (ON CA), , (1992), 70 CCC (3d) 341 (ONCA),, per curiam
- ↑ R v Green, 1943 CanLII 404 (BC CA), (1943) 79 CCC 227 (BCCA),, per Fisher JA
- ↑
R v Stratton, 1978 CanLII 1644 (ON CA), , (1978), 21 O.R. (2d) 258 (Ont. C.A.), per Martin JA
- ↑
R v Tomlinson, 2014 ONCA 158 (CanLII), per Watt JA, at para 77
- ↑
R v Titus, 1983 CanLII 49 (CanLII), per Ritchie J
- ↑ R v Garneau, 2012 NSCA 41 (CanLII), per MacDonald CJ
- ↑ R v Sheik-Qasim, 2007 CanLII 52983 (ON SC), ,, per Molloy J
Accused's Record
Except where the accused places his character at issue, the Crown cannot cross examine the witness on the accused of the prior criminal record. The crown can ask the accused of the date and place of conviction; the offence convicted; the sentence imposed. [1]
The defence can seek to limit the use of the criminal record by way of a "Corbett Application".
- ↑
R v Vincent, 1998 CanLII 6339 (ON CA), , [1998] OJ No 3666 (C.A.), per curiam at 16-17
R v Menard, 1996 CanLII 685 (ON CA), , (l996), 108 CCC (3d) 424 (Ont.C.A.), per Arbour JA, at pp. 435-436 affirmed (l998), 125 CCC (3d) 416 (SCC) at 427-428, 433
R v Bricker, 1994 CanLII 630 (ONCA), , 90 CCC (3d) 268 (Ont.C.A.), per Laskin JA, at pp. 274-279
R v Shortreed, 1990 CanLII 10962 (ON CA), (1990), 54 CCC (3d) 292 (Ont.C.A.),, per Lacourciere JA, at pp. 305-307
R v Furrant, [1983] 1 SCR 124, 1983 CanLII 118 (SCC), (1983), 4 CCC (3d) 354 (SCC), per Dickson J at 368-369
R v Laurier, 1983 CanLII 3507 (ON CA), (l983), I O.A.C. 128 (Ont.C.A.)(*no CanLII links) , at p. 131
R v Howard and Trudel (1983), 3 CCC (3d) 399 (Ont.C.A.),, per Howland CJ at 417
R v Lizotte, 1980 CanLII 2957 (QC CA), (1980), 61 CCC (2d) 423 (Que.C.A.),, per Kaufman JA, at 432-434
R v Boyce, 1975 CanLII 569 (ONCA), , 23 CCC (2d) 16 (Ont.C.A.), per Martin JA at 35-37
R v McLaughlin, 1974 CanLII 748 (ON CA), , (1974), 20 CCC 59 (Ont.C.A.), per Evans JA at 60-61
Non-Accused's Record
A non-accused witness may be cross-examined on the circumstances of an offence underlying a prior conviction.[1]
The criminal record of the deceased in a homicide cannot be used to suggest that the deceased’s “demise was a civic improvement”.[2]
The criminal record of a victim is relevant to “the probability of the deceased having been the aggressor and to support the accused’s evidence that he was attacked by the deceased".[3]
The record can be used to establish a violent disposition to carry or use a weapon and therefore increase the chances of the victim reaching for a weapon before their death.[4]
- ↑ R v Bugar, 2010 ABCA 318 (CanLII), per curiam
- ↑
R v Head, 2014 MBCA 59 (CanLII), per Mainella JA, at para 15
R v Varga (R.L.) (2001), 2001 CanLII 8610 (ON CA), 150 O.A.C. 358, per Doherty JA, at para 7
- ↑
R v Scopelliti (1981), 1981 CanLII 1787 (ON CA), 34 OR (2d) 524 at 535 (CA), per Martin JA
- ↑
Head, supra, at para 16
R v Sims (1994), 1994 CanLII 1298 (BC CA), 87 CCC (3d) 402, per Wood, at pp. 421-26 (BCCA)