R v Aho

Rex v Aho, [1904] 11 BCR 114 Aho was accused of murdering Johnson, and his lawyer motioned for leave to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal. Aho and Johnson left the group of men they were “drinking and ﬁghting” with in a lodging house, and reappeared shortly thereafter, Johnson after Aho, with a bad head injury that he later succumbed to. During the trial, witnesses for the Crown swore that Johnson indicated that the accused was responsible for his condition before expiring. The trial Judge, Justice Martin, determined this “dying declaration” was not admissible. (115) The defence presented no evidence. The motion for leave to appeal was heard before Chief Justice Hunter and Justices Irving, Martin, and Duff. Chief Justice Hunter decided that “the so-called dying declaration never had any existence,” and refutes Duff’s contention that the jury should have been excluded from the preliminary inquiry as to whether the uncertain dying declaration was admissible. (117) Irving, Martin, and Duff concurred with his judgement Plaintiffs The Crown Defendants Aho Appellants Aho Respondents The Crown Judges Chief Justice of Canada Hunter Justice of Canada Martin Justice of Canada Duff Justice of Canada Irving