The appellant was convicted of manslaughter and robbery with a firearm.
On appeal, he argued the trial judge erred by admitting hearsay evidence of a witness's prior testimony identifying him from a photo array, and by misdirecting the jury on the use of evidence regarding a black man fleeing the scene.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the hearsay evidence lacked threshold reliability because the witness's professed memory loss prevented meaningful cross-examination.
The court also held the jury instruction on flight was misleading.
The curative proviso could not be applied, and a new trial was ordered.