R. v. B. (W.R.), 1995 CanLII 128 (SCC), [1995] 1 SCR 750
Her Majesty The Queen Appellant
v.
W. R. B. Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. B. (W.R.)
1995: February 22.
Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia
Criminal law ‑‑ Evidence ‑‑ Recharge ‑‑ Reference in recharge to inadmissible evidence tendered on voir dire ‑‑ Reference so affecting verdict that new trial required.
APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (1994), 45 B.C.A.C. 133, 72 W.A.C. 133, allowing an appeal from conviction by Cooper J. sitting with jury and ordering a new trial. Appeal dismissed.
Elizabeth Bennett, Q.C., for the appellant.
Blair F. Suffredine, Q.C., for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Cory J. ‑‑
1We are all of the view that this appeal as of right must be dismissed. We agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the unfortunate reference on the recharge to the inadmissible evidence tendered on the voir dire must have so affected the verdict on all three counts that a new trial was required on all of them. Particularly is this so since the issue of credibility was crucial to all three charges.
2The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: The Attorney General of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Solicitors for the respondent: Suffredine, Burch, Nelson.