R. v. Tremblett

R. v. Tremblett

The court admitted the verbal utterance because the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt it was voluntary and not elicited by police; the police conduct, though forceful, was aimed at legitimate law‑enforcement objectives and not extracting a statement; the Crown was granted leave to recall Constable O'Neil to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 NSPC 118
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Augustus Clarence Tremblett
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Offences / Trial Evidence Ongoing With Voir Dire Concluded; Crown Seeking Leave to Recall Witness
Outcome
Crown application to recall witness granted; verbal utterance at the residence admitted; portions of the formal recorded statement admitted; trial to continue.
Legal Topics
Search and Seizure, Admissibility of Statements, Voluntariness/confessions Rule, Recall of Witness to Tender Exhibits, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional/charter Law Search and Seizure Admissibility of Statements Voluntariness/confessions Rule Recall of Witness to Tender Exhibits Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Augustus Clarence Tremblett

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Offences / Trial Evidence Ongoing With Voir Dire Concluded; Crown Seeking Leave to Recall Witness

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the verbal utterance at the residence was voluntary and admissible
  2. 2 Whether the Crown should be permitted to recall a witness to tender certificates of analysis and address continuity of exhibits

Ratio Decidendi

The court admitted the verbal utterance because the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt it was voluntary and not elicited by police; the police conduct, though forceful, was aimed at legitimate law‑enforcement objectives and not extracting a statement; the Crown was granted leave to recall Constable O'Neil to tender certificates of analysis because the omission was an oversight and recall causes no unfair prejudice to the accused.

Court Disposition

Crown application to recall witness granted; verbal utterance at the residence admitted; portions of the formal recorded statement admitted; trial to continue.

Orders

  • Leave granted to recall Constable O'Neil to testify about exhibits, continuity and to introduce certificates of analysis
  • Verbal utterance made at the residence admitted into evidence