The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We are all of the opinion that this appeal should be quashed. We do not think that any question of law arises under Justice O’Sullivan’s dissent on the question of the identification evidence through the use of photographs. At the most, the issue raised in the dissent involves a question of the sufficiency or weight of the evidence.
We refuse leave to appeal on the question whether the trial judge had erred in law in connection with the request for a voir dire. This point was not raised before the Manitoba Court of Appeal, and we do not think that, in the circumstances revealed by the record, the point arises in a form that would warrant its consideration here.
Judgment accordingly.
[Page 627]
Solicitors for the appellant: Sinclair, McCulloch, Kress & Jachetta, Winnipeg.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Manitoba.