Supreme Court


Evidence

CROSS-EXAMINATION
Improper cross-examination had no bearing on outcome of

voir dire

Accused charged with possession of cocaine for purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime. Defence counsel applied to exclude evidence pursuant to s. 24 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Counsel asked one police witness on voir dire to comment on veracity of other officers. Trial judge excluded evidence seized from accused for violations of his Charter rights and acquitted him. Court of Appeal allowed Crown’s appeal on basis that defence counsel’s cross-examination was improper. Appeal allowed and acquittal restored. Improper cross-examination had no bearing on outcome of voir dire.

R. v. Mian (Sep. 12, 2014, S.C.C., McLachlin C.J.C., LeBel J., Abella J., Rothstein J., Moldaver J., Karakatsanis J., and Wagner J., File No. 35132) Decision at 104 W.C.B. (2d) 276 was reversed.  116 W.C.B. (2d) 334.

cover image

DIGITAL EDITION

Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll


Law Times reports that the Correctional Service Canada has been found to be negligent in the severe beating of an inmate. Do you think inmate safety at jails and prisons needs significant improvement?
RESULTS ❯