Clément Monterosso

The Crown appealed acquittals entered on criminal organization counts and the quashing of a possession-for-trafficking conviction.

The Court held the possession verdict was unreasonable because the evidentiary nexus between the seized cocaine and the accused’s conspiracy was not proven.

It further held that the accused was not a member of the trafficking group for purposes of membership-based liability under the organized-crime provisions.

However, the Court found the trafficking offence was committed in association with the organization because the accused knowingly supplied and supported its operations.

The appeal was therefore allowed only to restore the conviction on the association-based count.

The appellants, recognized as Convention refugees in Canada due to persecution in Hungary based on their Roma ethnic origin, were sought for extradition by Hungary on fraud charges.

The Minister of Justice ordered their surrender, concluding they had not established a continuing risk of persecution.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that while the Minister has the authority to extradite a refugee, the Minister erred by placing the burden on the refugees to prove they would face persecution if returned.

The Court ruled that under section 44(1)(b) of the Extradition Act, a recognized refugee is presumed to face prejudice, and the burden is on the state to show the person is no longer entitled to refugee protection.

The appellant appealed from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal that set aside his acquittal for extortion and entered a conviction.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a brief oral judgment, dismissed the appeal.

The majority held that the trial judge drew the necessary findings from the evidence and that the substitution of a conviction for the acquittal was justified in the circumstances.

Two justices dissented and would have ordered a new trial.

The accused appealed a decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal that set aside his acquittal and substituted a verdict of guilty.

The Crown brought a motion to quash the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada granted the motion, finding that the trial judge's acquittal was based solely on an unlawfully admitted medical report and that the Court of Appeal did not err in substituting a guilty verdict.

The Crown appealed a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal that allowed the accused's appeal from a conviction for second degree murder and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasons of the Court of Appeal.