3 total
The court dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge provided sufficient reasons for his credibility determinations.
The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault against his stepdaughter on the ground that the trial judge's reasons were insufficient for meaningful appellate review.
The appellant argued the trial judge failed to adequately explain the rejection of his denials, failed to reconcile inconsistencies in the complainant's and her mother's evidence, and failed to address allegations of fabrication and collusion.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge's reasons clearly demonstrated his reasoning and that he was alive to the frailties in the evidence.
The trial judge's credibility findings were open to him on the record.
The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the admission of a video-recorded statement and the trial judge's credibility assessment of the complainant.
The appellant appealed a conviction entered by the Ontario Court of Justice, raising two issues: first, that the trial judge erred in admitting a video-recording of the complainant's police statement under s. 715.1 of the Criminal Code; and second, that the trial judge erred in assessing the complainant's credibility and reliability.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both arguments, finding that defence counsel had expressly consented to the video-recording's admission and that the trial judge had adequately considered the whole of the complainant's testimony while providing sufficient reasons for the conviction on the one incident.
Sentence reduced from six to four years due to inadequate application of Gladue principles.
The appellant sought leave to appeal from a global sentence of six years imposed for multiple offences including dangerous driving, attempted robbery, attempted theft, possession of stolen property, possession of instruments for breaking and entering, and driving while disqualified.
The Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge erred in failing to give adequate weight to Gladue factors relating to the appellant's Aboriginal background, intergenerational trauma, and systemic disadvantage.
The court reduced the sentence to four years, emphasizing that Gladue principles apply to serious offences and that consideration of such factors does not constitute a race-based discount but rather recognizes reduced moral blameworthiness and the disproportionate representation of Aboriginal peoples in the prison system.