The appellant appealed his convictions and sentences for multiple offences, including home invasion, death threats, obstructing justice, perjury, and fabricating evidence.
The Court of Appeal upheld the convictions related to the home invasion and threats, finding the Crown's case overwhelming and the appellant's version of events lacking an air of reality.
However, the court set aside the convictions for obstructing justice, perjury, and fabricating evidence, and ordered a new trial on those counts, because the trial judge erroneously relied on the non-existent testimony of a witness who did not testify.
The court substituted a global sentence of six months' imprisonment for the upheld convictions, noting that a conditional sentence was inappropriate given the serious nature of the offences.
