R v L & L (1994)

Mr Rice was retained by one of the two defendants in this case to appeal her convictions for aggravated assault and failing to provide the necessaries of life. During the Crown Attorney’s cross-examination of her at trial, it came to light that he was using information that had not been disclosed to the defence. The trial judge dismissed applications for a stay of proceedings or a mistrial. The Alberta Court of Appeal held that there was no doubt that the Crown Attorney had a duty to disclose the information to the defendants prior to trial. Springing the information on the defendant during cross-examination was prejudicial and resulted in an unfair trial. The appeal was granted and a new trial was ordered.

R v D D & N (1993)

This case began when a chambermaid found a package wrapped in brown paper in an Edmonton hotel room. She tore the top of the package open and saw a white substance inside. She thought it was Christmas cake and left the package in a utility room. Another hotel employee found it and thought it might be drugs. He called the police. The most recent guest in the room had checked out before the chambermaid found the package. The police set up surveillance to see if anyone would return to claim it. The investigation led to Mr Rice’s client and a group of friends who were all charged with conspiracy and possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. The prosecution attempted to establish a case of joint possession or constructive possession. After a lengthy preliminary inquiry the Crown Attorney realized that there was no reasonable likelihood of a conviction and withdrew all charges.

Page 10of 10: 1 ... 8 9 10