R. v. D'Amours, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 115
Régis D'Amours Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. D'Amours
1990: January 25.
Present: Lamer, Wilson, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec
Criminal law ‑‑ Appeal ‑‑ Fresh Evidence ‑‑ Whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to admit fresh evidence?
Cases Cited
Referred to: Palmer v. The Queen, 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal (1988), 15 Q.A.C. 58, dismissing the accused's appeal from his conviction on a charge of second degree murder. Appeal dismissed.
Johanne St‑Gelais, for the appellant.
Alain Gaumond, for the respondent.
English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by
Lamer J. ‑‑ We are all of the view that the appeal should be dismissed. One of the grounds of appeal has caught our attention and merits some comment. This is the ground dealing with the Court of Appeal's refusal to admit new evidence. Although the Court of Appeal correctly stated the test established by this Court in Palmer v. The Queen, 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759, regarding the admission of fresh evidence, and in particular the criterion that it must be likely to affect the result of the case, it erred in applying this test to the present case when it dismissed the application solely on the ground that the evidence in question would neither confirm nor corroborate the appellant's testimony. It does not necessarily follow that the evidence could not nevertheless have an impact on the verdict. We are of the view, however, that given the evidence already in the record, the fresh evidence could not in fact have affected the result.
The appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Johanne St‑Gelais, Montréal.
Solicitor for the respondent: Alain Gaumond, Québec.