R. V. P.(N.A.) (2002), 171 C.C.C. (3D) 70 (ONT. C.A. – DOHERTY) Para. 33: (quoting R. v. McNamara (No. 1) (1981), 56 C.C.C. (2d) 193 at 348 (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal ref’d (1981), 56 C.C.C. (2d) 576. (S.C.C.)): “An accused is not entitled, however, under the guise of repudiating the allegations against him to assert expressly or impliedly that Read more...
R v Sandhu, 2009 ONCA 102 (Laskin): [15] Second, much of the evidence given by both Mr. Sandhu and Ms. Sandhu is relevant to all the counts. For example, in discussing her marital relationship, Ms. Sandhu testified that she sought her husband’s permission before doing anything, that she did as she was told, and that she would not have left Read more...
R v Stubbs, 2013 ONCA 514 (Watt): [54] First, as a general (but not unyielding) rule, evidence of misconduct beyond that charged in an indictment, which does no more than portray an accused as a person of (general) bad character, is inadmissible: R. v. Handy, 2002 SCC 56, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 908, at paras. 31 and 36; R. v. Moo, Read more...