What is the necessity criterion in a co-conspiracy case?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. Barnes, 2007 CanLII 3223 (ON SC):
The necessity criterion is flexible and includes many circumstances. When considering the necessity criteria in a co-conspiracy case, “[t]he issue is the availability of the testimony, not the availability of the witness”. (See R v. Pilarinos [2002] B.C.J. No. 1324 at para 14.) As the following cases explain, the co-conspirator may be physically available but the testimony is rarely available.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.
Other Questions
Is there any case law or case law that states that parties are not aware of the effect of the case on the other side? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the relevant case law for giving evidence from a third party witness in a personal injury case? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a breach of the law by an individual who has committed acts of contempt of court? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law relating to scheduling of winter road patrols after March 31? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law where a plaintiff has been successful in a cy près distribution case? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a judge should consider some of the issues before the trial of the others? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on the admissibility of expert evidence in medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on expert testimony in medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the Underwriters argued that the preferable procedure criterion is not satisfied in the immediate case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the impact of a medical malpractice case on the economic impact of the case? (Ontario, Canada)
