McRitchie v. The Queen
- Citation
- [1977] 2 SCR 600
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 1 March 1977
- Posture
- Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 1 March 1977
- Posture
- Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The trial judge's refusal to admit Crown rebuttal evidence after the accused raised an alibi at the close of the Crown's case was an error of law, warranting setting aside the acquittal and ordering a new trial.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; new trial ordered.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Acquittal set aside; new trial ordered.
02
Material facts
Parties
Donald McRitchie
Appellant Counsel: J. RichardsonHer Majesty The Queen
Respondent Counsel: L.H. McDonald, Q.C.03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Crown may call rebuttal evidence after the accused raises an alibi at the close of the Crown's case
- 02
Whether the trial judge erred as a matter of law in refusing to admit the Crown's rebuttal evidence
- 03
Whether such an error requires setting aside an acquittal and ordering a new trial
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant argued that the trial judge properly excluded the Crown's rebuttal evidence raised after the accused first raised an alibi at the close of the Crown's case and that the resulting acquittal should stand.
- Respondent
- Crown argued that the trial judge erred as a matter of law in refusing to admit rebuttal evidence and that that error required setting aside the acquittal and ordering a new trial; the Court of Appeal agreed.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Court of Appeal for British Columbia; affirmed by Supreme Court of Canada (McRitchie v. The Queen [1977] 2 S.C.R. 600)
When an accused raises an alibi at the close of the Crown's case, the Crown may be permitted to call rebuttal evidence; exclusion of such evidence may constitute an error of law.
- 02
Court of Appeal for British Columbia; affirmed by Supreme Court of Canada (McRitchie v. The Queen [1977] 2 S.C.R. 600)
An error of law in excluding admissible evidence warrants setting aside an acquittal and ordering a new trial.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The trial judge's refusal to admit Crown rebuttal evidence after the accused raised an alibi at the close of the Crown's case was an error of law, warranting setting aside the acquittal and ordering a new trial.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; new trial ordered.
- Appeal dismissed.
- Acquittal set aside; new trial ordered.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 1 March 1977
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 1 March 1977
McRitchie v. The Queen Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1977-03-01 Report [1977] 2 SCR 600 Judges Laskin, Bora; Martland, Ronald; Judson, Wilfred; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Spence, Wishart Flett; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; de Grandpré, Louis-Philippe On appeal from British Columbia Subjects Criminal law Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada McRitchie v. The Queen, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 600 Date: 1977-03-01 Donald McRitchie Appellant; and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent. 1977: March 1. Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Judson, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz and de Grandpré JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Criminal law—Charge of unlawful possession of heroin for purpose of trafficking—Alibi evidence raised by accused at close of Crowns case—Crown permitted to call rebuttal evidence—Trial judge subsequently deciding rebuttal evidence not admissible—Court of Appeal holding trial judge’s refusal to allow rebuttal evidence was error of law alone—Acquittal set aside and new trial ordered. APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia reversing appellant’s acquittal by Skipp Co.Ct.J. on a charge of possession of a narcotic for the purpose of trafficking. Appeal dismissed. J. Richardson, for the appellant. L.H. McDonald, Q.C., for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We do not need to hear you, Mr. McDonald. We agree with the British Columbia Court of Appeal that there must be a new trial. The appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Solicitors for the appellant: Oliver, Waldock & Richardson, Vancouver. Solicitor for the respondent: D.S. Thorson, Ottawa.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.