Alice Gibson Barton

The appellant was convicted at trial of drug offences including possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of oxycodone, production of marijuana, and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

The Court of Appeal upheld the convictions, finding that although the trial judge erred in relying on the wrong legislative provision to admit cell phone data and may have erred in allowing the Crown to reopen its case and in admitting an accused's statement without a voluntariness voir dire, the curative proviso applied because the Crown's case was overwhelming.

The Supreme Court majority agreed, finding the pre-reopening evidence was overwhelming and the curative proviso was properly applied.

The dissent would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial on the basis that allowing the Crown to split its case led to an unfair trial that could not be cured.

The appellant was convicted of sexual assault and sexual interference arising from a single incident involving a six-year-old complainant.

The trial judge stayed the sexual assault conviction under the Kienapple principle and sentenced the appellant to 15 months in custody followed by one year probation.

On appeal, the Court found that the trial judge erred by using evidence of the complainant's emotional and psychological problems as a teenager to bolster the reliability of her testimony regarding the assault.

The trial judge improperly relied on the absence of alternative explanations for the complainant's behaviour and engaged in circular reasoning by using the complainant's acceptance of the causal link between the assault and her subsequent problems to support the reliability of her evidence of the assault itself.

The Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.