The accused was acquitted of conspiring to import a narcotic.
The Crown appealed, arguing the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the accused's membership in the conspiracy was required before the conspirators' exception to the hearsay rule could apply.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that the hearsay exception may be relied upon once direct evidence against the accused raises a probability of their membership in the conspiracy.
The trial judge's instruction imposed a higher burden of proof on the Crown than required by law.
