In R. v. Pan (Ont CA, 2023) the Court of Appeal comments on the greater range of submissions [para 88] and evidence [para 131] that counsel for a co-accused has in a joint trial:
[88] I begin with the basic principle that counsel for a co-accused in joint trials has more latitude, than does the prosecution, to make submissions that may be prejudicial to another accused. The prosecutor is more constrained: R. v. Suzack (2000), 2000 CanLII 5630 (ON CA), 128 O.A.C. 140 (C.A.), at para. 111.
....
[131] While the prosecution is prohibited from leading propensity evidence against an accused, one accused may be allowed to lead propensity evidence against a co-accused in a joint trial: R. v. Sheriffe, 2015 ONCA 880, 333 C.C.C. (3d) 330 at paras. 65-68, leave to appeal refused, [2016] S.C.C.A. No. 514; R. v. Marks (2000), 2000 CanLII 4096 (ON CA), 48 O.R. (3d) 161, 145 C.C.C. (3d) 569 (Ont. C.A.) at para. 17.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
