Examinations: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Text replacement - "<Br>" to "<br>" |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
; Appellate Review | ; Appellate Review | ||
The judge's decision on how a witness should be examined is entitled to deference.<ref> | The judge's decision on how a witness should be examined is entitled to deference.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Stewart|1z6bm|1976 CanLII 202 (SCC)|, [1977] 2 SCR 748}}at p. 751 to 752{{fix}}< | {{CanLIIRP|Stewart|1z6bm|1976 CanLII 202 (SCC)|, [1977] 2 SCR 748}}at p. 751 to 752{{fix}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIR|Le (TD)|frj5d|2011 MBCA 83 (CanLII)}} at para 254{{fix}}< | {{CanLIIR|Le (TD)|frj5d|2011 MBCA 83 (CanLII)}} at para 254{{fix}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIR|Okemow|hzpv6|2019 MBCA 37 (CanLII)}} at para 88{{fix}}<br> | {{CanLIIR|Okemow|hzpv6|2019 MBCA 37 (CanLII)}} at para 88{{fix}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Revision as of 18:49, 8 March 2021
General Principles
All examinations of witnesses are expected to be done in open court.[1]
- Summary Conviction Trials
802
...
- Examination of witnesses
(2) The prosecutor or defendant, as the case may be, may examine and cross-examine witnesses personally or by counsel or agent.
- On oath
(3) Every witness at a trial in proceedings to which this Part applies shall be examined under oath.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 737.
- Objections
Where trial counsel does not object to inadmissible evidence, that failure cannot make inadmissible evidence admissible.[2]
- Appellate Review
The judge's decision on how a witness should be examined is entitled to deference.[3]
- ↑ Re Krakat, 1965 CanLII 358 (ON SC), per Hughes J
- ↑
R v D(LE), 1989 CanLII 74 (SCC), , [1989] 2 SCR 111, per Sopinka J at 126-27
R v DCB, 1994 CanLII 6412 (MB CA), , (1994), 95 Man.R. (2d) 220, per Philp JA, at para 14
- ↑
R v Stewart, 1976 CanLII 202 (SCC), , [1977] 2 SCR 748at p. 751 to 752(complete citation pending)
R v Le (TD), 2011 MBCA 83 (CanLII) at para 254(complete citation pending)
R v Okemow, 2019 MBCA 37 (CanLII) at para 88(complete citation pending)