R. v. Howe

R. v. Howe

The application for an advance ruling that R.M. is adverse or hostile is premature and therefore dismissed; normal trial procedure will apply and leading questions remain permitted on non-controversial matters until a court rules otherwise, and the defence must first establish legal and evidentiary standing for any...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 NSSC 140
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Duayne Jamie Howe; Defendant: Patrick Michael James; Defendant: David John Pearce
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application for declaration that the complainant is adverse/hostile and for permission to cross-examine at large dismissed as premature; normal evidentiary procedure to be followed.
Legal Topics
Section 7 Charter, Abuse of Process, Adverse/hostile Witness, Canada Evidence Act S.9, Leading Questions, Hearsay Exception, Stay of Proceedings, Police Interview Practices
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Section 7 Charter Abuse of Process Adverse/hostile Witness Canada Evidence Act S.9 Leading Questions +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Duayne Jamie Howe

Defendant

Patrick Michael James

Defendant

David John Pearce

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police conduct (failure to record notes; threats/inducements) violated defendants' Section 7 rights
  2. 2 Whether such conduct amounts to an abuse of process warranting a stay
  3. 3 Whether R.M. is an adverse or hostile witness permitting cross-examination at large or leading questions

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an advance ruling that R.M. is adverse or hostile is premature and therefore dismissed; normal trial procedure will apply and leading questions remain permitted on non-controversial matters until a court rules otherwise, and the defence must first establish legal and evidentiary standing for any s.7 challenge based on alleged police inducement.

Court Disposition

Application for declaration that the complainant is adverse/hostile and for permission to cross-examine at large dismissed as premature; normal evidentiary procedure to be followed.

Orders

  • Application for advance declaration of adversity/hostility dismissed as premature
  • No ruling permitting cross-examination at large; parties must follow normal procedure and may renew applications with evidentiary basis