Jump to content

R v Smith (1992)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Good Olfactory (talk | contribs) at 03:16, 8 January 2015 (R v Smith). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

R v Smith
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: June 15, 1992
Judgment: August 27, 1992
Full case nameHer Majesty The Queen v Arthur Larry Smith
Citations[1992] 2 S.C.R. 915
Docket No.22281 [1]
Court membership
Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer
Puisne Justices: Gérard La Forest, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, John Sopinka, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, William Stevenson, Frank Iacobucci
Reasons given
Unanimous reasons byLamer C.J.

R v Smith, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 915 is a leading decision on hearsay by the Supreme Court of Canada. This decision, along with R v Khan (1990), began what is called the "hearsay revolution", supplementing the traditional categorical approach to hearsay exceptions with a new "principled approach" based on reliability and necessity of testimony.

Background

Arthur Larry Smith was accused of killing Aritha Monalisa King. It was believed that they had both traveled from Detroit to London, Ontario. While in Canada, Smith had asked King to smuggle drugs back for him. She refused and was killed by Smith. At trial, King's mother testified that she received four phone calls from her daughter the night of her death. The last call came from near where her body was found. King had told her mother she would be home very soon.

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the statements could be admissible as evidence. The trial judge admitted the evidence and Smith was convicted. On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial.

Judgment

Lamer C.J. writing for the Court, dismissed the appeal. His reasons focused on the "principled approach" first developed in the Khan case. He found that the new approach was not just limited to child testimony but rather was a new method that applied to all hearsay statements, calling it a "triumph of a principled analysis over a set of ossified judicially created categories".


See also

  1. ^ SCC Case Information - Docket 22281 Supreme Court of Canada