United States v. O'Connor (and Olaniyan)

Summary

Two people sought by the US for a pharmacy and medical-supply fraud scheme appealed extradition committal orders for fraud over $5,000. They argued the voice identification evidence was manifestly unreliable. The Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals, finding ample evidence: voice comparison was one factor among others, including circumstantial evidence, and the extradition judge considered the submissions. The Attorney General of Canada disclaimed ROC para 27.

Outcome

Both appeals dismissed; committal orders upheld (para 15). Appeals were against committal only, not the Minister's surrender order (para 3).

Why this case matters

Where voice identification was only one factor among several, an accent-based description did not make the identification manifestly unreliable, and the committal orders were upheld.

Paragraph references

Paras 7-8: AGC disclaimed ROC para 27; judge did not rely on it. Para 10: accent as one of multiple factors did not make voice ID manifestly unreliable; a reasonable jury could give it some weight. Paras 11-12: circumstantial evidence. Para 13: judge's single task was the committal test. Paras 14-15: no basis to interfere; dismissed.