Law360 Canada ( January 29, 2026, 9:37 AM EST) -- Appeal by appellant from his conviction for second-degree murder. Awai was murdered in his apartment, shot twice in the head. The sole issue at trial was the identity of the shooter. The appellant and Awai were friends and involved in the drug business. The Crown argued the appellant was the killer, while the defence maintained he visited for a drug transaction and left before the murder. Evidence placed the appellant at the apartment around the time of death, including text messages and cellphone records. A key Crown witness, Gregory, the appellant’s former partner, testified reluctantly and was cross-examined after adopting parts of her police statement, including that the appellant had called her shortly after the murder and confessed to shooting Awai. Defence counsel cross-examined Gregory on inconsistencies but did not explicitly suggest fabrication. Crown counsel objected to defence counsel’s suggestion in his closing address that Gregory made up the confession. Leaning on the rule in Browne v. Dunn, the Crown asked for a corrective instruction from the trial judge. The trial judge agreed, instructing the jury that they could not conclude Gregory fabricated her story because that was not put to her in cross-examination. The appellant argued on appeal that there was no breach of Browne v. Dunn and that the corrective instruction improperly restricted the jury’s ability to assess credibility. The Crown contended the rule was breached and the instruction was proper and alternatively sought application of the curative proviso given the strength of the Crown’s case....