Canada Case Law

R. v. Riley

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Court granted the Crown's s.9(2) application but limited the form and scope of cross-examination to protect the accused from prejudicial repetition: the Crown may identify one source for each material prior inconsistent statement and put it to the witness in traditional fashion to seek adoption but may not read or repeat unadopted prior statements multiple times; the Court declared the witness adverse under s.9(1) but did not permit unfettered at-large cross-examination absent a common-law finding of hostility, permitting instead a graduated approach (open-ended direct, leading if resista…

Source excerpt

• Canada evidence act s.9(1)
• Canada evidence act s.9(2)
• Milgaard procedure
• Coffin refreshment of memory
• Bradshaw principled hearsay exception
• Prior inconsistent statements

Read case analysis

R. v. Bottomley

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court admitted an eyewitness’s 911 call in a murder case, but required edits to remove parts that merely repeated his expected testimony.

• Admissibility of 911 call
• Prior consistent statements
• Narrative context
• Res gestae
• Principled approach (necessity and reliability)
• Admissibility-of-911-call

Read case analysis

R. v. Bottomley

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Voir dire on admissibility of drug-trafficking background, threats, post-offence conduct, and incomplete digital messages in a first-degree murder case.

• Discreditable conduct
• After-the-fact (post-offence) conduct
• Party admissions
• Partial/incomplete digital communications
• Relevance and probative/prejudicial balancing
• Identification of phone users

Read case analysis

R. v. Alkhalil

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court admitted portions of message string 81 under the documents in possession rule, finding evidence of adoption and circumstantial relevance to the alleged Duhre conspiracy.

• Documents in possession rule
• Hearsay exception - adoption
• Circumstantial evidence
• Party admission
• Text message evidence
• Documents-in-possession-rule

Read case analysis

R. v. Dechamp

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Crown failed to establish threshold reliability for the specific portions of Atwood's statement because procedural reliability was inadequate (no oath, no meaningful substitute for cross-examination) and substantive reliability was not established by corroboration that would rule out plausible alternative explanations; consequently the statements are inadmissible and the court would in any event exercise its residual discretion to exclude them.

Source excerpt

• Principled exception to hearsay
• Threshold reliability
• Procedural reliability
• Substantive reliability
• Residual discretion to exclude evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. D.M.D.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court admitted a child complainant’s 12 January 2017 video statement under s. 715.1, finding it was taken within a reasonable time and was not tainted by an earlier flawed interview.

• Section 715.1 criminal code
• Video-recorded statements
• Admissibility
• Proper administration of justice
• Reasonable time
• Reliability and weight of evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. Butcher

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The judge applied the documents-in-possession doctrine and antemortem hearsay principles, found the contested texts authentic and sufficiently contemporaneous to be relevant to the relationship, financial stress, motive and state of mind leading up to March 26, 2016, and concluded that their probative value (for motive, intent and state of mind) outweighed the risk of prejudice; accordingly the texts were admissible for limited purposes subject to redactions and limiting instructions.

Source excerpt

• Admissibility of text messages
• Documents-in-possession rule
• Antemortem hearsay/state of mind
• Similar fact/discreditable conduct evidence
• Probative vs prejudicial balancing

Read case analysis

R. v. Butcher

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Most of the deceased’s antemortem statements and electronic communications were admissible: they either fit the present intention/state of mind exception or satisfied the principled necessity and threshold reliability tests given corroboration from multiple witnesses and contemporaneous messages such that alternative explanations were reasonably excluded on a balance of probabilities. However the specific utterance “I just broke up with Nick” was excluded because the voir dire evidence did not rule out plausible alternative explanations for that material statement and therefore threshold/subs…

Source excerpt

• Antemortem hearsay
• State of mind / present intention exception
• Principled exception (necessity and reliability)
• Threshold vs ultimate reliability
• Probative versus prejudicial balancing
• Electronic communications as hearsay

Read case analysis

R. v. Moir

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court refused to admit the accused’s recorded phone call with his mother unless he testified, finding the statement was self-serving hearsay and not saved by any exception.

• Admissibility of prior statements
• State of mind evidence
• Mixed-statement exception
• Mr. big/hart doctrine
• Narrative evidence
• Demeanour evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. Baier

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal from convictions for break and enter, assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, and uttering threats was dismissed. The Court upheld the trial judge’s identification findings and circumstantial corroboration.

• Identification evidence
• Corroboration
• Misapprehension of evidence
• Hearsay admissibility
• Burden of proof and reasonable doubt
• Impeachment and refreshing memory

Read case analysis