The appellant appealed his conviction for break and enter, arguing the trial judge erred in relying on the doctrine of recent possession without rejecting the complainant's vague description of the intruders.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding the trial judge gave no weight to the vague descriptions and was entitled to rely on recent possession.
The Crown appealed the 12-month sentence, arguing it was outside the range for home invasions and failed to consider psychological harm.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the sentence appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's approach given the offender's circumstances and the lack of submissions on psychological harm at trial.
