R. V. UNDERWOOD (1998), 121 C.C.C. (3D) 117 (S.C.C. – LAMER) Para. 7: “In this context, the case-to-meet principle suggests that the accused should have a right to make a Corbett application, and to know its outcome at the close of the Crown’s case.” Read more...
R. v. Underwood (1998), 121 C.C.C. (3d) 117 (S.C.C. – Lamer) Para. 9: “…[T]he situation can be resolved by holding a voir dire before the defence opens its case. In this voir dire, the defence will reveal the evidence which it intends to call, either through calling witnesses, or through agreed statements of fact. The trial judge can then consider Read more...
R. V. P.(N.A.) (2002), 171 C.C.C. (3D) 70 (ONT. C.A. – DOHERTY) Para. 26: “In cases, like this one, where credibility is central to the outcome at trial, the balance may tip in favour of permitting cross-examination on an accused’s criminal record if the accused mounts an all-out attack on the credibility and character of the Crown witnesses. Where that Read more...