Canadian Criminal Evidence/Cases/Hearsay

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search

Categorical Exceptions[edit]

State of Mind[edit]

  • R v Wysochan (1930) 54 CCC 172 (SKCA) -- "there's a bullet in my body" -- admitted
  • R v Edwards (1994) 91 CCC 3d 123 (ONCA) -- cell phone messages suggestive of trafficking -- admitted for purpose of establishing the activities of accused and intent to respond.

Res Gestae[edit]

  • R. v. Villeda, 2011 ABCA 85 -- complainant's 911 call admitted in evidence as res gestae hearsay dispite issues with impairment
  • R. v. Khan, 2010 ONCJ 580 -- complainant's 911 call admissible for prosecution as res gestae

Principled Exceptions[edit]

General[edit]

  • R. v. Deelespp, 2002 ABPC 85 (CanLII) - admitted
  • R. v. Agwa and Ojulu, 2011 MBPC 21 - admitted
  • R. v. Sasakamoose, 2008 SKPC 164 - rejected
  • R. v. E.C., 2007 SKPC 27
  • R. v. K.P.H., 2007 ABQB 728
  • R. v. Kontzamanis, 2007 BCSC 1603 - dismissed
  • R. v. Williams, 2006 NSCA 23, [2006] N.S.J. No. 63 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Sigovin [2006] O.J. No. 1967 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)--admitted statement
  • R. v. White, 2006 ABQB 888 - dismissed
  • R. v. Adam et al, 2006 BCSC 1355 -
  • R. v. Aronis, 2005 CanLII 2057 (ON SC), [2005] O.J. No. 286 (Ont. S.C.)
  • R. v. Beekmann [2005] A.J. No. 385 (Alta. QB)
  • R. v. Levesque [2004] O.J. No. 2528 (Ont. S.C.)
  • R. v. A.M., 2004 ONCJ 185, [2004] O.J. No 3770 (Ont. S.C.)
  • R. v. Johnson, 2004 NSCA 91, [2004] N.S.J. No. 280 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Michaud, 2004 CanLII 7714 (ON CA), [2004] O.J. No. 2098, (Ont. C.A.)
  • R. v. P.S.B., 2004 NSCA 25, [2004] N.S.J. No. 49 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Singh [2004] O.J. No. 1799 (Ont. Ct. Jus) --Domestic offence--statement admitted
  • R. v. Scott, 2004 NSCA 141, [2004] N.S.J. No. 451 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Malik [2004] BCJ No. 456 (B.C.S.C.)
  • R. v. Morehouse, 2004 ABQB 97, [2004] A.J. No. 123 (Alta. Q.B.)
  • R. v. Strauss, 2004 SKPC 146, [2004] S.J. No. 846 (Sask. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Wodage [2004] M.J. No. 61 (Man. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Prince, 2004 BCPC 163, [2004] B.C.J. No. 1277 (BC. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Czibulka, 2004 CanLII 22985 (ON CA), [2004] O.J. No. 3273 (Ont. C.A.)
  • R. v. Nolin, 2003 CanLII 5923 (MB PC), [2003] M.J. No. 270 (Man. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Wilder [2003] B.C.J. No. 2884
  • R. v. Campbell, 2002 NSCA 35, [2002] N.S.J. No. 120 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Nazareth [2002] O.J. No. 4085 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. Nejad, 2002 BCPC 617, [2002] B.C.J. No. 3067 (B.C. Prov. Ct.) -- domestic violence -- statement admitted-- 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] N.S.J. No. 434 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Oakley, 2001 NSPC 36, [2001] N.S.J. No. 537 (NS Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Pennell, 2001 NSPC 12, [2001] NSJ No. 211(NS Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Nguyen, 2001 ABCA 98, [2001] A.J. No. 513 (Alta. C.A.)
  • R. v. Glowatski, 2001 BCCA 678 [2001] B.C.J. No. 2499 (B.C.C.A.)
  • R. v. Auger [2001] N.W.T.J. No. 45 (NWT Sup. Ct.)
  • R. v. Morrissey [ 2001] O.J. No. 498 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. Armstrong [2001] O.J. No. 2348 (Ont. Sup. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. J. M. [2001] O.J. No. 1748 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. Lavallee [2000] S.J. No. 43 (Sask. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Diu, 2000 CanLII 4535 (ON CA), [2000] O.J. No. 1770 (Ont. C.A.)
  • R. v. Deschenes [2000] O.J. No. 4658 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. R. B. [2000] O.J. No. 1888 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. Schwartzenburg [2000] O.J. No. 2655 (Ont. S.C. Jus.) --domestic offence--not admitted--
  • R. v. Van Osselaer [1999] B.C.J. No. 3140 (B.C.S.C.)
  • R. v. St. Croix [1999] N.J. 214 (Nfld. S.C.)
  • R. v. MacLeod [1999] O.J. No. 4325--domestic offence--statement admitted--victim claimed at trial it was accident--not under oath or video tapted
  • R. v. Duong [1999] O.J. No. 1651 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)
  • R. v. Merz, 1999 CanLII 1647 (ON CA), (1999) 140 C.C.C. (3d) 259 (Ont. C.A.)
  • R. v. Bartlett [1999] O.J. No. 3313 (Ont. Ct. Jus.)--domestic offence--statement admitted--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.)
  • R. v. Fraser, 1997 CanLII 2562 (NS SC), [1997] N.S.J. No. 541 (NSSC)
  • R. v. Conway, 1997 CanLII 2726 (ON CA), (1997) 121 C.C.C. (3d) 397 (Ont C.A.)
  • R. v. O’Keefe [1997] N.J. No. 314 (Nfld. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Chartrand [1997] M.J. No. 552 (Man. Q.B.)
  • R. v. Mohamed [1997] O.J. No. 1298 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. Campbell [1997] O.J. No. 5837 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)
  • R. v. W.B. [1997] O.J. No. 5382 (Ont. Prov. Ct.) --domestic assault, threats--witness gave video statement, left country--admitted statement--corroboration
  • R. v. Leopold [1996] N.S.J. No. 544 (NS Prov. Ct)
  • R. v. Pottie [1996] N.S.J. No. 138 (NSCA)
  • R. v. Collins [1996] O.J. No. 2881 (Ont Prov. Ct.)--statement admitted--recanted witness
  • R. v. J.K. [1996] B.C.J. No. 2751 (B.C.Y.C.)
  • R. v. Woycheshen [1996] M.J. No. 570 (Man. Prov. Ct.) -- statement not admitted --
  • R. v. Smart [1995] O.J. No. 4182 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)

Deceased witness[edit]

Recanting witness[edit]

  • R. v. C.M., 2012 ABPC 102 - witness gave preliminary inquiry testimony, later said that it was all a lie--prior statement admitted
  • R. v. McCormack et al., 2008 ONCJ 286 -- prior written statement evidence partially admitted
  • R. v. Tomlinson, 2008 CanLII 58424 (ONSC) -- oral utterance to police; inadmissible
  • R. v. Devine, 2007 ABCA 49 -- girlfriend keeps changing story; ID evidence admitted
  • R. v. Rombough, 2006 ABPC 262 -- video statement admitted
  • R. v. Nejad, 2004 BCSC 1819 -- statement to police admitted
  • R. v. Duong, 1998 CanLII 3585 (ON C.A.) [1] -- reject prior testimony of co-accused placing accused at scene; witness proven liar
  • R. v. Hrynyk, 1998 ABPC 160 -- under oath statement admitted

Forgetful witnesses[edit]

  • R. v. Thomas (R.J.), 2009 MBCA 85 -- "forgetful" witness gave video statement; admitted.
  • R. v. Woodard, 2009 MBCA 42 -- "forgetful" witness; prior statement admissible
  • R. v. E.C., 2007 SKPC 27 -- witness "forgets"; prior statement admissible
  • R. v. Moreau, 2006 NUCJ 8 -- prior statement not admitted
  • R. v. Malik and Bagri, 2004 BCSC 2004 -- forgetful witness gave statement; admitted as past recollection recorded

Refusal to testify[edit]

  • R. v. Cansanay, 2009 MBCA 59 -- gang members refuse to testify; overturn exclusion of statements
  • R. v. U. (S.), 2007 NUCJ 20 -- statement admitted
  • R. v. Goodstoney, 2005 ABQB 128 -- 2 out of 3 KGB statements rejected
  • R. v. Scott, 2004 NSCA 141 -- KGB statement wrongly admitted in 2004 NSSC 13
  • R. v. Charles, 1997 CanLII 9699 (SK C.A.) -- 3 prior statements inadmissible

Disabled witness[edit]

Youthful witness[edit]

Otherwise unavailable[edit]

  • R. v. Clark, 2008 ABQB 384 -- missing witness; PI testimony admissible
  • R. v. Lewis, 2003 NSPC 3 -- witness gave 2 statements, was available but failed to attend court; statement inadmissible
  • R. v. May, 2012 BCSC 802 - admissible - Preliminary Inquiry transcript

Confession[edit]

Misc[edit]

  • R v Singh-Murray, 2011 NBPC 33 -- KGB statement not admissible

Domestic Violence cases[edit]

  • R. v. Abel, 2011 NLTD 173 -- hearsay evidence of murder victim reporting multiple incidents of violence to family was inadmissible under principled approach
  • R. v. Pasqualino, 2008 ONCA 554 -- admitted for est. motive, intent and animus -- statement of victim reporting past physical and verbal abuse.
  • R. v. Moo, 2009 ONCA 645 -- 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 --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 -- admitted to establish motive in domestic homicide
  • R. v. Bari, 2006 NBCA 119 -- admissible to show victim's fear / state of mind
  • R. v. Van Osselaer, 2002 BCCA 464 -- 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 -- admitted to prove intent, motive and identity, and relationship between the parties
  • R. v. Nickerson, [1996] N.S.J. No. 342 -- 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--