Hearsay (Cases)
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 [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | 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 [[Court of King's Bench of Alberta|]] |
prelim evidence was admitted under s. 715 | |
| R v Beah, 2013 ONSC 2490 (CanLII), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] |
application under .715(1)(d) granted |
Principled Exception to Hearsay
General
| Case Name | Result | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| R v Frederickson, 2013 BCSC 779 (CanLII), per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] |
rejected in part | |
| R v Clarke, 2013 MBQB 26 (CanLII), per [[Court of King's Bench of Manitoba|]] |
admitted | |
| R v House, 2012 ONSC 6749 (CanLII), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] |
rejected (agreed stmt) admitted (interview) |
|
| R v Serre 2012 ONSC 3210 (CanLII), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] |
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 [[Provincial Court of Alberta|]] |
admitted | |
| R v Agwa and Ojulu, 2011 MBPC 21 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Manitoba|]] |
admitted | |
| R v Sasakamoose, 2008 SKPC 164 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Saskatchewan|]] |
rejected | |
| R v E.C., 2007 SKPC 27 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Saskatchewan|]] |
||
| R v K.P.H., 2007 ABQB 728 (CanLII), per [[Court of King's Bench of Alberta|]] |
||
| R v Kontzamanis, 2007 BCSC 1603 (CanLII), per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] |
dismissed | |
| R v Williams, 2006 NSCA 23 (CanLII), [2006] NSJ No. 63 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] |
||
| R v Sigovin [2006] O.J. No. 1967 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) |
admitted | |
| R v White, 2006 ABQB 888 (CanLII), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] | dismissed | |
| R v Adam et al, 2006 BCSC 1355 (CanLII), per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] | ||
| R v Aronis, 2005 CanLII 2057 (ON SC), [2005] O.J. No. 286 (Ont. S.C.), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] | ||
| R v Beckmann, 2005 ABQB 227 (CanLII), [2005] A.J. No. 385 (Alta. QB), per Lee J | ||
| R v Levesque [2004] O.J. No. 2528 (Ont. S.C.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v A.M., 2004 ONCJ 185 (CanLII), [2004] O.J. No 3770 (Ont. S.C.), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] | ||
| R v Johnson, 2004 NSCA 91 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 280 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Michaud, 2004 CanLII 7714 (ON CA), [2004] O.J. No. 2098, (Ont. C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | ||
| R v P.S.B., 2004 NSCA 25 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 49 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Singh [2004] O.J. No. 1799 (Ont. Ct. Jus)(*no CanLII links) | admitted | Domestic offence |
| R v Scott, 2004 NSCA 141 (CanLII), [2004] NSJ No. 451 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Malik, 2004 BCSC 299 (CanLII), [2004] BCJ No. 456 (BCSC), per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] | ||
| R v Morehouse, 2004 ABQB 97 (CanLII), [2004] A.J. No. 123 (Alta. Q.B.), per [[Court of King's Bench of Alberta|]] | ||
| R v Strauss, 2004 SKPC 146 (CanLII), [2004] S.J. No. 846 (Sask. Prov. Ct.), per [[Provincial Court of Saskatchewan|]] | ||
| 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 [[Provincial Court of British Columbia|]] | ||
| R v Czibulka, 2004 CanLII 22985 (ON CA), [2004] O.J. No. 3273 (Ont. C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | ||
| R v Nolin, 2003 CanLII 5923 (MB PC), [2003] M.J. No. 270 (Man. Prov. Ct.), per [[Provincial Court of Manitoba|]] | ||
| R v Wilder, 2003 BCSC 1840 (CanLII), [2003] BCJ No. 2884, per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] | ||
| R v Campbell, 2002 NSCA 35 (CanLII), [2002] NSJ No. 120 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Nazareth [2002] O.J. No. 4085 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v Nejad, 2002 BCPC 617 (CanLII), [2002] BCJ No. 3067 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), per [[Provincial Court of British Columbia|]] | 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 E.J.F., 2001 NSCA 158 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 434 (NSCA), per [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Oakley, 2001 NSPC 36 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 537 (NS Prov. Ct.), per [[Nova Scotia Provincial Court|]] | ||
| R v Pennell, 2001 NSPC 12 (CanLII), [2001] NSJ No. 211(NS Prov. Ct.), per [[Nova Scotia Provincial Court|]] | ||
| R v Nguyen, 2001 ABCA 98 (CanLII), [2001] A.J. No. 513 (Alta. C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal of Alberta|]] | ||
| R v Glowatski, 2001 BCCA 678 (CanLII), [2001] BCJ No. 2499 (BCCA), per [[British Columbia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Auger, 2001 NWTSC 30 (CanLII), [2001] N.W.T.J. No. 45 (NWT Sup. Ct.), per [[Territorial Courts|]] | ||
| R v Morrissey [2001] O.J. No. 498 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v Armstrong [2001] O.J. No. 2348 (Ont. Sup. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v J.M. [2001] O.J. 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 [[Provincial Court of Saskatchewan|]] | ||
| R v Diu, 2000 CanLII 4535 (ON CA), [2000] O.J. No. 1770 (Ont. C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | ||
| R v Deschenes [2000] O.J. No. 4658 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v R.B. [2000] O.J. No. 1888 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v Schwartzenburg [2000] O.J. 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 [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] | ||
| R v St. Croix, 1999 CanLII 19721 (NL SCTD), [1999] N.J. 214 (Nfld. S.C.), per [[Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador|]] | ||
| R v MacLeod [1999] O.J. 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] O.J. 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 [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | ||
| R v Bartlett [1999] O.J. 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 [[Nova Scotia Supreme Court|]] | ||
| R v Conway, 1997 CanLII 2726 (ON CA), (1997) 121 CCC (3d) 397 (Ont C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | ||
| 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] O.J. No. 1298 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v Campbell [1997] O.J. No. 5837 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)(*no CanLII links) | ||
| R v W.B. [1997] O.J. 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 [[Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|]] | ||
| R v Collins [1996] O.J. 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] O.J. 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 C.M., 2012 ABPC 102 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Alberta|]] | 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 [[Ontario Court of Justice|]] | prior written statement evidence partially admitted |
| R v Tomlinson, CanLII 58424 (ONSC), per [[Ontario Superior Court of Justice|]] | oral utterance to police; inadmissible |
| R v Devine, 2007 ABCA 49 (CanLII), per [[Court of Appeal of Alberta|]] | girlfriend keeps changing story; ID evidence admitted |
| R v Rombough, 2006 ABPC 262 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Alberta|]] | video statement admitted |
| R v Nejad, 2004 BCSC 1819 (CanLII), per [[Supreme Court of British Columbia|]] | statement to police admitted |
| R v Duong, 1998 CanLII 3585 (ON C.A.), per [[Court of Appeal for Ontario|]] | reject prior testimony of co-accused placing accused at scene; witness proven liar |
| R v Hrynyk, 1998 ABPC 160 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Alberta|]] | under oath statement admitted |
Forgetful witnesses
| Case Name | Summary |
|---|---|
| R v Thomas (R.J.), 2009 MBCA 85 (CanLII), per [[Manitoba Court of Appeal|]] | "forgetful" witness gave video statement; admitted. |
| R v Woodard, 2009 MBCA 42 (CanLII), per [[Manitoba Court of Appeal|]] | "forgetful" witness; prior statement admissible |
| R v E.C., 2007 SKPC 27 (CanLII), per [[Provincial Court of Saskatchewan|]] | 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 |