The appellant was convicted of multiple offences, including robbery with a firearm, arising from a home invasion.
The Crown's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant's DNA on a pry bar left at the scene and his subsequent arrest in a stolen vehicle containing items taken during the robbery.
On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge misapprehended identification evidence, failed to consider alternative explanations for the DNA evidence, and erred in finding a real firearm was used.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding the trial judge's assessment of the circumstantial evidence was reasonable and the alternative explanations were speculative.
The sentence appeal was also dismissed.
