Warren K. Zimmer

The appellant was convicted of aggravated assault.

The Crown failed to disclose a statement made by an eyewitness, though a summary was included in police reports provided to the defence.

The Court of Appeal found that defence counsel had exercised due diligence in pursuing disclosure.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the undisclosed statement could have affected the defence's strategy, such as the decision not to call evidence.

The Court concluded that the non-disclosure affected the fairness of the trial process and impaired the appellant's right to make full answer and defence.

The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.

The Crown appealed a decision of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, agreeing with the dissenting judge in the Court of Appeal that the trial judge erred in applying the Debot factors to find that the police officer lacked reasonable and probable grounds for the search.

The judgments below were set aside and a new trial was ordered.

The appellants appealed their convictions, arguing that evidence obtained during an open-space search violated their rights under section 8 of the Charter.

The Supreme Court of Canada assumed, without deciding, that the search was unreasonable.

However, the Court upheld the Court of Appeal's finding that the admission of the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The appeal was dismissed.