The appellant was convicted of second-degree murder.
At trial, the Crown cross-examined the appellant on statements he made to police regarding alleged police harassment, which were not introduced in the Crown's case-in-chief.
The trial judge permitted the Crown to call rebuttal evidence to contradict the appellant's answers under section 11 of the Canada Evidence Act.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trial judge erred, as the issues raised were collateral and did not go to the determinative issue of guilt or innocence.
The Crown was bound by the appellant's answers on cross-examination and could not split its case by calling rebuttal evidence.
The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.