R. v. Broomfield
The trial judge erred by instructing the jury that the witness's evidence as to the date was hearsay and by characterizing the witness in a manner that exceeded fair comment and usurped the jury's function; that error was not harmless, so the conviction must be set aside and a new trial ordered.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C21646
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Evert Broomfield
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 1 December 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Decision by Court of Appeal on Jury Instruction and Evidence Errors
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; new trial ordered
- Legal Topics
- Hearsay, Jury Instructions, Trial Judge Conduct, Miscarriage of Justice
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Evert Broomfield
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Decision by Court of Appeal on Jury Instruction and Evidence Errors
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred by instructing the jury that a witness's evidence about the date of the incident was hearsay and could not be relied on
- 2 Whether the trial judge's characterization of a witness exceeded fair comment and usurped the jury's function
- 3 Whether any instructional error was harmless in the context of the whole charge
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge erred by instructing the jury that the witness's evidence as to the date was hearsay and by characterizing the witness in a manner that exceeded fair comment and usurped the jury's function; that error was not harmless, so the conviction must be set aside and a new trial ordered.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; new trial ordered
Orders
- Appeal allowed
- Conviction set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Broomfield Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 1998-12-01 Docket numbers C21646 Judges Morden, John Wilson; Austin, Allan McNiece; Rosenberg, Marc Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 19981201 DOCKET: C21646 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. EVERT BROOMFIELD (Appellant) BEFORE: MORDEN A.C.J.O., AUSTIN and ROSENBERG JJ.A. COUNSEL: Howard Borenstein for the appellant Riun Shandler for the respondent HEARD: November 30, 1998 ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view, the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that Mr. Francis's evidence as to the date of the incident in relation to the time he was at the appellant's home was based on hearsay upon which they could not rely. This is conceded by counsel for the respondent who submitted, however, that the error was overborne by other portions of the charge. In our view, it was not. Further, we think that the trial judge's characterization of the witness Francis exceeded the bounds of fair comment in such a way as to usurp the function of the jury. [2] The appeal is allowed, the conviction is set aside, and a new trial is ordered.