Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

  

 

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

 

Citation: R. v. Larue, 2019 SCC 25, [2019] 2 S.C.R. 398

 

Appeal Heard: April 23, 2019

Judgment Rendered: April 23, 2019

Docket: 38224

 

Between:

Norman Eli Larue

Appellant

 

and

 

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

 

 

 

Coram: Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Côté and Brown JJ.

 

 

Reasons for Judgment:

(paras. 1 to 2)

Abella J. (Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Côté and Brown JJ. concurring)

 

 

 


R. v. Larue, 2019 SCC 25, [2019] 2 S.C.R. 398

Norman Eli Larue                                                                                          Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                             Respondent

Indexed as: R. v. Larue

2019 SCC 25

File No.: 38224.

2019: April 23.

Present: Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Côté and Brown JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for yukon

                    Criminal law — Evidence — Admissibility — Hearsay — Key witness refusing to testify at accused’s first degree murder trial — Trial judge admitting witness’s hearsay statements under principled approach to hearsay evidence — Accused convicted — Court of Appeal dismissing appeal — Trial judge did not err in ruling that threshold reliability of witness’s hearsay statements had been established — Conviction upheld.

Cases Cited

                    Applied: R. v. Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 865.

                    APPEAL from a judgment of the Yukon Court of Appeal (Bennett, Dickson and Charbonneau JJ.A.), 2018 YKCA 9, 47 C.R. (7th) 133, [2018] Y.J. No. 45 (QL), 2018 CarswellYukon 50 (WL Can.), affirming the conviction of the accused for first degree murder. Appeal dismissed, Karakatsanis and Brown JJ. dissenting.

                    Vincent Larochelle, for the appellant.

                    James C. Martin and Noel Sinclair, for the respondent.

                    The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

[1]                              Abella J. — Applying R. v. Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 865, a majority of this panel would dismiss the appeal largely for the reasons of Dickson J.A., and Justices Karakatsanis and Brown would allow substantially for the reasons of Bennett J.A.

[2]                              The appeal is therefore dismissed.

                    Judgment accordingly.

                    Solicitor for the appellant: Tutshi Law Centre, Whitehorse.

                    Solicitor for the respondent: Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Halifax, Whitehorse.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.