R. v. Tremblett

R. v. Tremblett

Although Constable Timmons met traditional Mohan qualifications to give expert opinion on street-level cocaine packaging, pricing and distribution, his active participation in the investigation — including supplying information used to obtain the search warrant — and his expressed belief that the accused was a trafficker created a real apprehension of bias; that partiality was sufficiently grave that admission of his expert opinion would imperil fairness and integrity of the trial and therefore the evidence must be excluded (de-weighting inadequate).

Citation
2012 NSPC 121
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Augustus Clarence Tremblett
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (possession for the Purpose of Trafficking) / Trial Voir Dire on Admissibility of Expert Opinion Evidence
Outcome
Expert opinion evidence of Constable Timmons excluded; witness not qualified to give the proposed expert evidence in this trial.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence Admissibility, Apprehension of Bias, Mohan Criteria, Gatekeeper Discretion/cost Benefit Analysis, Search Warrant Foundation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Search and Seizure Expert Evidence Admissibility Apprehension of Bias Mohan Criteria Gatekeeper Discretion/cost Benefit Analysis +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Augustus Clarence Tremblett

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (possession for the Purpose of Trafficking) / Trial Voir Dire on Admissibility of Expert Opinion Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Constable Timmons should be qualified as an expert to opine on pricing, distribution and packaging of cocaine
  2. 2 Whether the witness's participation in the investigation and provision of information for the search warrant creates an apprehension of bias or actual bias
  3. 3 How Mohan criteria interact with gatekeeper discretion and the role of partiality in admissibility

Ratio Decidendi

Although Constable Timmons met traditional Mohan qualifications to give expert opinion on street-level cocaine packaging, pricing and distribution, his active participation in the investigation — including supplying information used to obtain the search warrant — and his expressed belief that the accused was a trafficker created a real apprehension of bias; that partiality was sufficiently grave that admission of his expert opinion would imperil fairness and integrity of the trial and therefore the evidence must be excluded (de-weighting inadequate).

Court Disposition

Expert opinion evidence of Constable Timmons excluded; witness not qualified to give the proposed expert evidence in this trial.

Orders

  • Exclude the expert opinion evidence of Constable Timmons in this trial; do not qualify him as an expert to give the proposed evidence