What is the effect of introducing new evidence at trial that takes the accused by surprise?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. Tkachuk, 1984 ABCA 26 (CanLII):
The introduction of new evidence at trial that takes the accused by surprise to his prejudice is in most cases remedied by the granting of an adjournment. In Caccamo v. Regina 1975 CanLII 11 (SCC), 21 C.C.C.(2d) 257 (S.C.C.) at page 276, De Grandpre J. said this: “It is within the framework of the adversary system, under which our criminal law is administered, that the accused must be guaranteed a fair trial. In that light, if the introduction of new evidence at the trial takes the accused by surprise, obviously he is entitled to a postponement.”
"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.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is new evidence submitted as fresh evidence admissible at trial? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the effect of the trial judge's disapproval of how the police gathered evidence during the investigation? (Alberta, Canada)
When can a witness give evidence that is not in evidence at trial? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the effect of pre-trial publicity on the right to a fair trial? (Alberta, Canada)
What constitutes “non-expert opinion evidence” in identification evidence at trial? (Alberta, Canada)
Can defence counsel argue that the accused has a right to adduce his new evidence for the first time? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for assessing exculpatory evidence in a sexual assault trial? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the effect of a spouse’s argument that the value of their property is to be divided according to the value it retains at the time of trial? (Alberta, Canada)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that the use of evidence that could not have been obtained but for the purposes of the trial was unfair? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a finder of fact not compelled to discount the evidence of a witness on a point when an opposing witness has not been confronted and challenged with the contrary version of the evidence? (Alberta, Canada)
