R v Charles
| Jurisdiction | Saskatchewan |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan) |
| Neutral Citation | 2024 SKCA 8 |
| Citation | 2024 SKCA 8 |
| Docket Number | CACR3658 |
| Date | 19 January 2024 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
6 practice notes
-
R v. Stevenson
...to reason as though a witness’s ability to provide details necessarily confirms their account as credible (see, for example: R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 at paras 42–46). But this does not mean that assigning weight to the detail and cogency of a witness’s testimony when assessing credibility i......
-
R v. Arendt
...v Crevier, 2015 ONCA 619 at para 74, 330 CCC (3d) 306 [Crevier]; R v Sadikov, 2014 ONCA 72 at para 38, 305 CCC (3d) 421; and R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 at paras [58] This approach comports with Sopinka J.’s description in Garofoli of the limited role of a reviewing judge (at 1550): The review......
-
R. v. Velasquez
...Ms. Velasquez also refers me to R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 [Charles SKCA]. In that case, the reviewing judge held that information provided by three confidential informants was insufficiently compelling because it lacked detail or particularity and was stated in boilerplate language. For exam......
-
R. v. Thompson
...to be treated as silos. Weaknesses in one area may be offset by strengths in another: R. v. Debot, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1140; R. v. Charles, 2024 SKCA 8. [39] Information may also be confirmed and corroborated without necessarily providing evidence......
Get Started for Free
5 cases
-
R v. Stevenson
...to reason as though a witness’s ability to provide details necessarily confirms their account as credible (see, for example: R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 at paras 42–46). But this does not mean that assigning weight to the detail and cogency of a witness’s testimony when assessing credibility i......
-
R v. Arendt
...v Crevier, 2015 ONCA 619 at para 74, 330 CCC (3d) 306 [Crevier]; R v Sadikov, 2014 ONCA 72 at para 38, 305 CCC (3d) 421; and R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 at paras [58] This approach comports with Sopinka J.’s description in Garofoli of the limited role of a reviewing judge (at 1550): The review......
-
R. v. Velasquez
...Ms. Velasquez also refers me to R v Charles, 2024 SKCA 8 [Charles SKCA]. In that case, the reviewing judge held that information provided by three confidential informants was insufficiently compelling because it lacked detail or particularity and was stated in boilerplate language. For exam......
-
R. v. Rusha
...categories and are not to be treated as silos. Weaknesses in one area may be offset by strengths in another: Debot (SCC); R. v. Charles, 2024 SKCA 8. Was the Information provided Credible? [31] Counsel for Mr. Rusha argued that the informants were anything but credible given their involveme......
Get Started for Free
