Supreme Court


Evidence not so decisive as to allow immediate disposition in form of acquittal

Victim was shot and killed in nightclub and his brother was shot and wounded. Accused and another convicted of first degree murder and attempted murder. Crown’s theory was that accused shaved his head upon returning home from shootings to change his appearance. Accused’s application to adduce fresh evidence of experts who conducted forensic examination of hair clippings to determine whether they could have been hair from accused’s scalp granted. Fresh evidence was directly relevant to whether accused was shooter. Appropriate remedy was new trial. Expert evidence could reasonably be expected to have affected verdict but was not so decisive as to allow immediate disposition in form of acquittal.

R. v. Hay (Nov. 8, 2013, S.C.C., McLachlin C.J.C., LeBel J., Fish J., Abella J., Rothstein J., Cromwell J., and Wagner J., File No. 33536) 110 W.C.B. (2d) 96.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Lawyers have expressed concerns that of 38 justices of the peace the province appointed this summer, only 12 have law degrees. Do you think this is an issue?