Summary

Keywords

Criminal law — Evidence — Witnesses — Disclosure — Trial fairness — Applicant convicted of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder — Applicant brought an application for fresh evidence at the court of appeal and appealed convictions — Whether payments made to witnesses, in exchange for or in order to secure their testimony, should form part of the Crown’s first party disclosure obligations — Whether the manner in which witness payment disclosure was provided complied with the Crown’s disclosure obligations pursuant to R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326 — Whether the Court of Appeal erred by failing to consider whether the trial was unfair — What is the appropriate remedy when the accused establishes the Crown (or the police) deliberately withheld disclosure?

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) (COURT FILE CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY THE PUBLIC)

The applicant, Mr. Petrin, a high ranking member of a group involved in drug operations, was charged with first degree murder contrary to s. 235(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C 46, and conspiracy to commit murder contrary to s. 465(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. These charges arose after the applicant asked two of his associates to “take care” of his right hand man who left the group without his permission. A woman was shot and killed when the two associates fired shots into the front of her home mistakenly believing that her address was that of the right hand man.

At trial, the judge availed herself of a Vetrovec warning because the Crown’s case was largely based on the testimony of witnesses who were involved with the group. Mr. Petrin was ultimately convicted on the two charges. At the Court of Appeal, Mr. Petrin’s application for fresh evidence relating to payments made to Crown witnesses by police and relating to a criminal record held by one of said witnesses was dismissed. The appeal from the convictions was also dismissed.

Lower Court Rulings