R. v. W.H.A.

R. v. W.H.A.

The judge dismissed the mistrial motion because jurors had just taken their oaths and had not heard evidence, the accused would not remain restrained during the remainder of the trial, and established authorities support that an explicit, clear instruction reiterating the presumption of innocence and reliance only on evidence will cure any prejudice from jurors having seen shackles.

Citation
2011 NSSC 167
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: W. H. A.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Jury Selection Motion for Mistrial
Outcome
Motion to declare mistrial dismissed
Legal Topics
Mistrial, Restraints on Accused, Presumption of Innocence, Jury Instructions, Shackling
Source Language
English

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

W. H. A.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Jury Selection Motion for Mistrial

  1. 1 Whether visible shackles on the accused during jury selection required a mistrial
  2. 2 Whether the accused may be restrained in the courtroom without a prior hearing demonstrating reasonable grounds
  3. 3 Whether a trial judge's instruction can cure any prejudice arising from jurors seeing the accused shackled

Ratio Decidendi

The judge dismissed the mistrial motion because jurors had just taken their oaths and had not heard evidence, the accused would not remain restrained during the remainder of the trial, and established authorities support that an explicit, clear instruction reiterating the presumption of innocence and reliance only on evidence will cure any prejudice from jurors having seen shackles.

Court Disposition

Motion to declare mistrial dismissed

Orders

  • Motion to declare mistrial dismissed