The appellant appealed convictions for assault, sexual assault, and uttering threats, and the custodial sentence.
The appeal against conviction argued the trial judge erred in applying R. v. W.(D.) by failing to find a reasonable doubt due to alleged inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence regarding the timing of disclosure to her brother.
The appeal against sentence argued it was excessive and that enhanced credit for COVID-19 conditions was warranted.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals, finding no material inconsistency in the evidence and no error in the trial judge's W.(D.) analysis or the fitness of the sentence.
