24 total
Crown appeal of Review Board disposition dismissed, save for adding uncontested conditions prohibiting intoxicants and weapons.
The Crown appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board that granted the respondent limited community access for special purposes.
The Court of Appeal found the Board's order was supported by evidence from the treating psychiatrist and was not unreasonable.
The Court allowed the appeal only to the extent of adding uncontested conditions prohibiting the respondent from possessing intoxicants and weapons, which had been inadvertently omitted from the Board's order.
Appeal from committal to stand trial for manslaughter dismissed.
The appellant appealed a decision upholding his committal to stand trial on a charge of manslaughter.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the reviewing judge's conclusion that a reasonable jury could find the appellant formed a common intention with a group to assault and intimidate rival gang members, and knew or should have known that bodily harm was likely to result.
The appeal was dismissed.
Summary conviction court lacks jurisdiction to hear freestanding costs application after charges are withdrawn.
The Crown appealed an order of the Superior Court of Justice that overturned a summary conviction judge's ruling.
The summary conviction judge had held that he lacked jurisdiction to hear a freestanding application for costs based on alleged Charter breaches after the Crown withdrew the charges prior to arraignment and plea.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the summary conviction judge's ruling.
The Court held that absent abuse of process or flagrant impropriety by the Crown, the summary conviction court's jurisdiction ends when charges are withdrawn, and it cannot hold a freestanding hearing on costs.
The respondent's remedy lies in a civil action.
Appeal from conviction for importing cocaine dismissed; trial judge's credibility findings and verdict were reasonable.
The appellant appealed her conviction for importing cocaine, arguing the trial judge's verdict was unreasonable due to misapprehension of evidence, reliance on improper factors in assessing credibility, and failure to consider defence submissions.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge carefully reviewed a wide range of factors, her credibility findings were supported by the evidence, and she had properly considered counsel's submissions.