R. v. Smith

R. v. Smith

The Court held that the trial judge’s strong and unequivocal mid‑trial instruction and final jury charge cured any prejudice from the inadvertent bad character evidence, that a mistrial was unnecessary, and therefore the conviction must be upheld.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 ONCA 469
Parties
Appellant: Dennis Smith; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence dismissed as abandoned.
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Mistrial, Mid‑trial Instructions, Jury Directions
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Evidence Bad Character Evidence Mistrial Mid‑trial Instructions Jury Directions

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dennis Smith

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (court of Appeal)

  1. 1 Whether inadvertent bad character evidence given by two witnesses prejudiced the jury and required a mistrial
  2. 2 Whether a mid‑trial instruction and the trial judge’s final charge cured any prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the trial judge’s strong and unequivocal mid‑trial instruction and final jury charge cured any prejudice from the inadvertent bad character evidence, that a mistrial was unnecessary, and therefore the conviction must be upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence dismissed as abandoned.

Orders

  • Conviction upheld; appeal dismissed
  • Sentence appeal dismissed as abandoned