R. v. MacKenzie

R. v. MacKenzie

Because the eyewitnesses never adopted or identified specific photographs or the Instruction sheet, there was no nexus between any extrajudicial photographic identification and their in-court identifications; Constable Longley's testimony recounting the out-of-court selections would therefore be hearsay if tendered for truth and its admission would deny the defence a fair opportunity to test reliability; in the absence of reliable identification and any corroborating evidence, the Crown failed to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused must be acquitted.

Citation
2003 NSPC 51
Parties
Crown: R.; Accused: Daniel John MacKenzie
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Break and Enter and Theft / Trial Decision (acquittal)
Outcome
Acquitted (not guilty)
Legal Topics
Photographic Line Up, Extrajudicial Identification, Hearsay Rule, Cross Examination, Identification Evidence, Acquittal
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Photographic Line Up Extrajudicial Identification Hearsay Rule Cross Examination Identification Evidence Acquittal

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Crown

Daniel John MacKenzie

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Break and Enter and Theft / Trial Decision (acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police testimony recounting witnesses' out-of-court photographic selections is admissible or constitutes hearsay
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient nexus between prior photographic identification and in-court identification to add cogency
  3. 3 Whether admitting police testimony would deny the accused a fair trial by preventing effective cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

Because the eyewitnesses never adopted or identified specific photographs or the Instruction sheet, there was no nexus between any extrajudicial photographic identification and their in-court identifications; Constable Longley's testimony recounting the out-of-court selections would therefore be hearsay if tendered for truth and its admission would deny the defence a fair opportunity to test reliability; in the absence of reliable identification and any corroborating evidence, the Crown failed to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused must be acquitted.

Court Disposition

Acquitted (not guilty)

Orders

  • Acquittal entered on the record