3 total
Sentence appeal allowed on Crown concession to grant 1.5 to 1 pre-sentence custody credit.
The appellant appealed his conviction and sentence.
The conviction appeal was abandoned and dismissed.
On the sentence appeal, the Crown conceded that the appellant should receive credit for pre-sentence custody on a 1.5 to 1 basis.
The Court of Appeal allowed the sentence appeal and varied the sentence to 68 months less 24 months credit for pre-sentence custody.
Prior Charter ruling from mistrial not binding where perceived judicial bias risks fairness.
The Crown applied under s. 657.3 of the Criminal Code to have a prior Charter ruling from a first trial applied to a second trial after the first proceeding ended in a mistrial.
The mistrial had been declared when the trial judge disclosed a personal relationship with a key investigating officer, giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
The Crown argued that, pursuant to s. 653.1 of the Criminal Code, evidentiary and Charter rulings made before the merits stage should remain binding in the retrial unless contrary to the interests of justice.
The court held that the integrity of the justice system and the requirement of impartial adjudication outweighed efficiency concerns.
Given the risk that the public might perceive the earlier ruling as tainted by unconscious bias, the Charter application should be reheard.
Court orders limited production of police occurrence reports under O’Connor likely relevance threshold.
In a joint prosecution for drug trafficking and firearm possession, the accused brought a motion seeking disclosure of police occurrence reports relating to prior charges against each accused that had been withdrawn, stayed, or resulted in acquittals.
The request was framed as a third‑party records application under the regime established in R. v. O’Connor.
The court considered whether such materials met the first‑stage threshold of “likely relevance” in relation to credibility, character, and propensity issues anticipated at trial where each accused intended to blame the other.
The court held that occurrence reports relating to withdrawn allegations of drug trafficking and possession of stolen property could meet the low threshold of logical relevance for disclosure purposes.
Production to the court of limited police synopsis “front sheets” relating to the withdrawn charges was ordered for judicial review, subject to Crown redactions for privilege and a later balancing of privacy interests against the right to full answer and defence.
