Adam Patrick Gerard Rice

The decision concerns the bail application of Matias Domingo Sanchez Nanuclef, who faces extradition to the United States for his alleged involvement in a $15 million jewellery store burglary in San Diego.

The court reviews the factual background, the legal onus for bail in extradition cases, and the proposed plan of release.

The application is denied on the primary, secondary, and tertiary grounds, with the court finding that the applicant is not ordinarily resident in Canada, poses a flight risk, and that detention is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice.

The United States sought the extradition of Sabrina Elofer.

Elofer brought an application for extraordinary disclosure, leave to cross-examine police officers, and a stay of proceedings based on alleged abusive state conduct, which was dismissed.

Elofer then sought reconsideration of that decision, arguing she had not had a full opportunity to make submissions on all issues.

The court dismissed the request for reconsideration, finding no error in its prior decision and that the applicant's arguments had been sufficiently heard and lacked an air of reality to justify further proceedings or a stay.

The Attorney General of Canada sought an order to commit the respondent, Jayant Bhatia, into custody for extradition to the United States for prosecution on fraud charges.

Bhatia brought a disclosure application regarding a cooperating witness (CW-1), arguing CW-1's identification evidence was manifestly unreliable.

The court summarily dismissed the disclosure application, finding that a witness's cooperation or criminal record is insufficient to deem evidence manifestly unreliable in an extradition context, and that ample independent evidence of identification existed.

The court then granted the committal order for extradition, finding sufficient evidence for trial on all essential elements of fraud, including identification.

The United States requested the extradition of Colin Levy for alleged involvement in MDMA distribution and cocaine importation.

The Attorney General of Canada sought a committal order under the Extradition Act.

Levy's counsel argued insufficient identification evidence, particularly concerning single photo identification.

The court found that the identification evidence, including witness testimony from someone who knew Levy and surveillance by a special agent, was not manifestly unreliable.

The court distinguished previous case law on single photo identification, noting that it is not inherently unreliable if the witness had prior knowledge of the subject, reinforcing *United States of America v. Khuc* and *R. v. Liebhardt*.

The court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to justify an order for committal for extradition.

On a criminal appeal concerning party liability for cocaine trafficking, the appellants challenged convictions entered after the appellate court set aside acquittals.

The court held that, on the trial judge's factual findings, aiding and abetting through protective conduct for the distribution operation was established.

The reasons accepted that the appellants' acts hindered interference and provided assistance and encouragement to the principal offender.

The court affirmed the appellate disposition and dismissed both appeals.