R. v. Balbar

Parties

Procedural Posture

Criminal First Degree Murder / Voir Dire on Admissibility of Expert Evidence (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether Dr. Nicholaichuk's expert opinion on intellectual testing is admissible
2. 2 Whether Dr. Nicholaichuk may opine on the psychological significance of the accused's intellectual capacity and propensity to falsely confess
3. 3 Whether the proposed psychological opinion meets the Mohan preconditions of relevance, necessity, absence of exclusionary rule and proper qualification

Ratio Decidendi

Admit the expert evidence limited to the results of Dr. Nicholaichuk's intellectual testing and his opinion as to the accused's intellectual capacity because the expert was properly qualified and the testing results were reliable; exclude the expert's opinion on the psychological significance and the propensity to falsely confess because it lacked sufficient reliable foundation, the expert was not familiar with the relevant undercover operation or supporting peer-reviewed literature, portions relied on hearsay, and the subject matter fell within ordinary experience such that the Mohan necessity threshold was not met; a jury instruction will address reliability concerns regarding the...

Court Disposition

Partially admitted. Dr. Nicholaichuk's opinion on intellectual testing and intellectual capacity admitted; his opinion on psychological significance and propensity to falsely confess/exaggerate excluded.

Orders

• Admit Dr. Nicholaichuk's opinion evidence limited to the results of psychological testing and his conclusion that the accused falls within the moderately mentally retarded range of intellectual ability
• Exclude Dr. Nicholaichuk's opinion evidence concerning the psychological significance of the accused's intellectual capacity and any opinion that the accused was more likely to falsely confess or exaggerate