R. v. Enns

R. v. Enns

Proposed expert evidence was excluded as unnecessary and unqualified under Mohan/White Burgess standards; on the merits the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the Mellor Courthouse's proximity to the HRP detachment creates a probability of juror bias or undermines jury representativeness such that ss.7 or 11(d) are breached—any theoretical confusion or discomfort is speculative and can be addressed by judicial instructions; accordingly the Charter application is dismissed.

Citation
2021 NSSC 270
Parties
Respondent/crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Applicant/accused: Christopher Enns
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charter Application / Charter Application (pre Trial Decision)
Outcome
Charter application dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 7 Charter, Section 11(d) Charter, Change of Venue, Jury Representativeness, Expert Evidence Admissibility, Venue and Courthouse Design, Bias and Impartiality
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Evidence Jury Law Section 7 Charter Section 11(d) Charter Change of Venue Jury Representativeness +3 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent/crown

Christopher Enns

Applicant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charter Application / Charter Application (pre Trial Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility and qualification of proposed expert evidence
  2. 2 Whether proximity of police detachment to courthouse infringes ss.7 and 11(d) of the Charter
  3. 3 Necessity of expert evidence for resolving representativeness and bias issues

Ratio Decidendi

Proposed expert evidence was excluded as unnecessary and unqualified under Mohan/White Burgess standards; on the merits the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the Mellor Courthouse's proximity to the HRP detachment creates a probability of juror bias or undermines jury representativeness such that ss.7 or 11(d) are breached—any theoretical confusion or discomfort is speculative and can be addressed by judicial instructions; accordingly the Charter application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Charter application dismissed

Orders

  • Charter application dismissed
  • Expert opinion evidence of Dr. Nikolay Kovalev and Dr. Veronica Stinson excluded as inadmissible