The appellant was convicted of first degree murder following a fatal shooting at a nightclub.
The Crown's theory was that the appellant killed the deceased in revenge for a prior stabbing incident.
At trial, the Crown relied on eyewitness identification and out-of-court statements made by the deceased to his mother, which were admitted under the principled exception to the hearsay rule.
On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial judge erred by failing to give a Chartier instruction regarding eyewitness identification and by admitting the hearsay statements.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that a Chartier instruction was not required as there was direct recognition and supporting evidence, and that the trial judge did not err in finding the hearsay statements met the threshold reliability criterion.
