The appellant appealed his conviction for break, enter and theft.
At trial, the Crown's principal witness, an admitted participant in the crime, testified that he acted alone, contradicting a prior statement to police that implicated the appellant.
The trial judge permitted the Crown to cross-examine the witness on the prior statement under s. 9(2) of the Canada Evidence Act.
The witness never adopted the statement, and the Crown did not apply to admit it under the principled exception to the hearsay rule.
However, the trial judge admitted the statement as an exhibit and instructed the jury they could use it as substantive evidence.
The Crown conceded this was an error.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and entered an acquittal.
