Supreme Court of Canada Hearings

Following a trial before judge and jury in the Superior Court of Quebec, the appellant was acquitted of one count of first degree murder in the shooting death of a victim that occurred at a restaurant. The only issue at trial was the identity of the shooter and whether proof established beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the appellant. On appeal, the Crown submitted that the trial judge erred in law in instructing the jury to acquit the appellant if it believed, or had a reasonable doubt, that the shooter had blond hair. The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the Crown’s appeal and ordered a new trial, finding that the trial judge made a material error in the jury instructions regarding the eyewitness identification evidence.

Argued Date

2026-11-05

Keywords

Criminal law — Charge to jury — Evidence — Identification — Eyewitness identification evidence — Whether the trial judge erred by instructing the jury that if it accepted eyewitness evidence that the shooter had blond hair, or was left with a reasonable doubt by that evidence, it had to acquit the appellant — Whether trial judges can identify exculpatory portions of eyewitness evidence for the jury — Whether trial judges can provide a W.(D.) instruction tying exculpatory portions of eyewitness evidence to the concept of reasonable doubt.

Notes

(Quebec) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Language

English Audio

Disclaimers

This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).