The appellant, an Uber driver, appealed his conviction for sexual assault of a passenger, arguing the trial judge applied uneven scrutiny and misapprehended evidence.
The Crown cross-appealed the 60-day conditional sentence, arguing it was demonstrably unfit given the breach of trust.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error or material misapprehension of evidence.
The Court allowed the Crown's sentence appeal, finding the trial judge erred in principle and imposed a demonstrably unfit sentence that failed to reflect the serious breach of trust by a professional driver.
The sentence was increased to six months' imprisonment.
