R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20
| Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
| Judge | Honourable Justice Peter M. S. Bryson |
| Citation | 2020 NSCA 20 |
| Date | 03 March 2020 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
| Docket Number | CAC 490018 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
14 practice notes
-
R. v. Barrett,
...95; R. v. Taylor, 2012 ONCA 809; R. v. Naicker, 2007 BCCA 608; R. v. MacDonald, 2020 NSCA 69; R. v. Lights, 2020 ONCA 128; R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20; R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742 Subject: Criminal; Criminal—murder; Evidence; Evidence—admissibility; Evidence—hearsay; Evidence—K.G.B. s......
-
R. v. Boyer,
...or any other accused at trial, but it does now permit us to regard the trial evidence through that lens. (See also R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20 at para. [57] I recognize the absence of evidence from Mr. Boyer, although he did call evidence on certain matte......
-
R. v. Murphy,
...proper effect to evidence (R. v. Morrissey (1995), 97 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (Ont. C.A.); R. v. Izzard, 2013 NSCA 88, at para. 40; R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20, at para. [49] During oral argument, counsel acknowledged she could not identify in the trial judge’s ......
-
R. v. Coburn,
...the evidence excluded any reasonable alternative was itself unreasonable.’ These comments were adopted by this Court in R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20 at para. [27] An allegation that a trial judge did not properly apply R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742 raises a question of law and is to be r......
Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
-
R. v. Barrett,
...95; R. v. Taylor, 2012 ONCA 809; R. v. Naicker, 2007 BCCA 608; R. v. MacDonald, 2020 NSCA 69; R. v. Lights, 2020 ONCA 128; R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20; R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742 Subject: Criminal; Criminal—murder; Evidence; Evidence—admissibility; Evidence—hearsay; Evidence—K.G.B. s......
-
R. v. Boyer,
...or any other accused at trial, but it does now permit us to regard the trial evidence through that lens. (See also R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20 at para. [57] I recognize the absence of evidence from Mr. Boyer, although he did call evidence on certain matte......
-
R. v. Murphy,
...proper effect to evidence (R. v. Morrissey (1995), 97 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (Ont. C.A.); R. v. Izzard, 2013 NSCA 88, at para. 40; R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20, at para. [49] During oral argument, counsel acknowledged she could not identify in the trial judge’s ......
-
R. v. Coburn,
...the evidence excluded any reasonable alternative was itself unreasonable.’ These comments were adopted by this Court in R. v. Roberts, 2020 NSCA 20 at para. [27] An allegation that a trial judge did not properly apply R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742 raises a question of law and is to be r......
Request a trial to view additional results