R. v. Charles

R. v. Charles

The judge admitted the accused's statements and gesture to Ms. Brooks and the statements to Corporal Martin as spontaneous/excited utterances and voluntary statements with sufficient external indicia of reliability; admitted Doreen Joseph's statement as proof of present intention or, alternatively, as reliable hearsay given her unavailability; and admitted Bonnie Charles' testimony about her son's inability to drive a manual transmission as relevant and a matter of weight for the jury.

Citation
2009 BCSC 1391
Parties
Prosecutor: Regina (Crown); Accused: Andrew Anthony Charles
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired and Dangerous Driving Causing Death / Voir Dire (admissibility Hearing)
Outcome
Voir dire rulings: key challenged statements and testimony were ruled admissible
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Admissibility of Statements, Res Gestae / Spontaneous Utterance, Hearsay Exceptions, Reliability of Statements
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Road Traffic Offences Forensic Evidence Identification Evidence Admissibility of Statements Res Gestae / Spontaneous Utterance Hearsay Exceptions +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecutor

Andrew Anthony Charles

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired and Dangerous Driving Causing Death / Voir Dire (admissibility Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements attributed to the accused to Ms. Brooks and Corporal Martin are admissible as res gestae/spontaneous utterances
  2. 2 Whether statements made by the deceased Doreen Joseph are admissible (present intention or hearsay exception)
  3. 3 Whether statements about ability to drive by or about the deceased Glenn Charles Jr. are admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The judge admitted the accused's statements and gesture to Ms. Brooks and the statements to Corporal Martin as spontaneous/excited utterances and voluntary statements with sufficient external indicia of reliability; admitted Doreen Joseph's statement as proof of present intention or, alternatively, as reliable hearsay given her unavailability; and admitted Bonnie Charles' testimony about her son's inability to drive a manual transmission as relevant and a matter of weight for the jury.

Court Disposition

Voir dire rulings: key challenged statements and testimony were ruled admissible

Orders

  • Admit statements and gesture by the accused to T. L. Brooks as res gestae/spontaneous utterance evidence
  • Admit statements by the accused to Corporal Martin regarding identities and driver as voluntary and relevant evidence