Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Ontario Court of Appeal upheld convictions for human trafficking, threats, assault and drug trafficking, rejecting evidentiary, fairness and Browne v. Dunn arguments.
The admission of the shower incident was proper because it was relevant to motive and to rebut fabrication and explain the complainant's conduct; no limiting instruction was required where the evidence was admitted for motive and defence counsel did not object but used the material tactically; the prior consistent statement was not led for its truth so a corroboration instruction was unnecessary; and the trial judge's direction to consider each count separately sufficed to prevent cross-count reasoning — therefore no miscarriage of justice occurred and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The prior uncharged incidents alleged to have occurred in India are admissible for the limited purposes of providing context about the nature of the relationship and demonstrating animus/motive because they are relevant and have probative value that outweighs their prejudicial effect in a judge-alone trial where the evidence is solely the complainant's testimony; they are not admissible to establish propensity or bad character and must not be used for any purpose other than the circumscribed purposes stated by the Crown.
Source excerpt
Pre-hearing ruling on evidence in a parole ineligibility review: some prior violent conduct evidence admitted, many unproven allegations excluded, and the 911 transcript admitted but not the audio.
The Court dismissed the Crown appeal because the trial judge acted within his discretion: the recharge did not preclude the jury from finding adoption of specific inculpatory passages; exclusion of the accused’s violent criminal record was a reasonable balancing of probative value against prejudice in light of evidence already before the jury; and defence counsel’s improper remarks, while wrong, did not meet the heavy burden to upset a jury acquittal.
Source excerpt
Admit limited background evidence that police responded to a June 17 shooting and that Cromwell appeared to have been shot; exclude Cromwell's statements to police attributing the shooting to Vonhiltgen and explaining it by a drug debt, and exclude evidence of the handgun produced June 18 and fingerprints thereon because their prejudicial effect outweighed any probative value; permit other police-contact narrative facts necessary to contextualize September 4 events; rule videotaped August 11 statement voluntary but defer rulings on its use pending trial development; rule post-September 4 stat…
Source excerpt
Trial reasons in a manslaughter prosecution arising from Aaron Webster’s death in Stanley Park. Ryan Cran was convicted; Danny Rao was acquitted for lack of proof.
The trial judge’s factual findings that police actions were undertaken in good faith with legitimate security and logistical concerns were reasonable and defeated the claim of unreasonable denial of access under ss.7 and 11(d); deficiencies in the reasonable doubt instruction were not such as to deny a fair trial when the charge is read as a whole; exclusion of the 1986 stabbing evidence was an error of discretion but harmless under the curative proviso; verdicts were not inconsistent for a reasonable jury; the life sentence for attempted murder was within appropriate range given aggravating…
Source excerpt
On a voir dire, the Court admitted the accused’s May 1999 threats and related evidence, but excluded evidence of a prior November 1998 assault as too prejudicial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal from an abortion conviction, holding the substitute judge had jurisdiction and prior similar acts were admissible in rebuttal.
Explore more
