R. v. Harris

R. v. Harris

The application to amend the indictment at the outset of trial is dismissed with leave to renew after evidence on the classification is called because the proposed amendment is properly characterized as one to conform to the evidence under s.601(2) (or s.601(3)(b)(iii)) and should be considered after evidence is adduced; the defence was not legally prejudiced by the timing because the restricted classification was disclosed early and the alleged prejudice amounted only to loss of an argument.

Citation
2014 BCSC 1058
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Michael Brent Harris
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Opening of Trial Crown Application to Amend Indictment Before Evidence Called
Outcome
Crown application to amend indictment dismissed at this stage with leave to renew after relevant evidence is called
Legal Topics
Section 601 Criminal Code Amendments, Defect in Form Vs Substance, Prejudice and Fair Trial, Preliminary Inquiry Disclosure, Mutual Exclusivity of Prohibited and Restricted Firearms
Source Language
English
Criminal Procedure Evidence Firearms Law Indictment Practice Section 601 Criminal Code Amendments Defect in Form Vs Substance Prejudice and Fair Trial Preliminary Inquiry Disclosure +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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Michael Brent Harris

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Opening of Trial Crown Application to Amend Indictment Before Evidence Called

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court may amend an indictment at the outset of trial under s.601(3) to correct a misclassification of a firearm as prohibited when disclosure and expert reports identified it as restricted
  2. 2 Whether the alleged error is a defect in form or a variance requiring amendment to conform to evidence under s.601(2)
  3. 3 Whether allowing the amendment would prejudice the accused and require a new trial

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend the indictment at the outset of trial is dismissed with leave to renew after evidence on the classification is called because the proposed amendment is properly characterized as one to conform to the evidence under s.601(2) (or s.601(3)(b)(iii)) and should be considered after evidence is adduced; the defence was not legally prejudiced by the timing because the restricted classification was disclosed early and the alleged prejudice amounted only to loss of an argument.

Court Disposition

Crown application to amend indictment dismissed at this stage with leave to renew after relevant evidence is called

Orders

  • Application to amend denied without prejudice; Crown permitted to renew application after evidence on firearm classification has been called