Case information

Criminal law – Evidence – Expert evidence – Jury charge – Standard of review – With respect to the test for admissibility of defence expert evidence did the majority of the Court of Appeal apply too strict a standard on the relevance and necessity criterion for admissibility of evidence – Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal impermissibly narrowed the scope of appellate review of a trial judge’s charge to the jury and failed to appreciate how inaccuracies and deficiencies in a charge to the jury can prejudice the fairness of the trial.

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)(CERTAIN INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC)

The applicant and a co-accused broke into a restaurant intending to rob a cannabis dispensary which is beside the restaurant. The victim arrived at his restaurant after receiving a notification on his phone indicating that an alarm had been triggered. A struggle ensued during which the victim was stabbed and later died from his injuries. Earlier that morning and during the previous evening the applicant had consumed alcohol and drugs. The applicant testified at trial that he could not remember stabbing the victim due to being intoxicated. At trial, a voir dire was held wherein the applicant sought to have Dr. Jones qualified as an expert witness, and sought to introduce his evidence on intoxication. The trial judge dismissed the defence’s application for failing to meet the threshold requirements of relevance and necessity. After a trial by judge and jury, the applicant was convicted of second degree murder. The conviction appeal was dismissed.