2 total
Murder conviction appeal dismissed; trial judge properly admitted computer search evidence under s. 24(2).
The appellant appealed his two murder convictions, arguing the trial judge erred in admitting evidence from his cellphone and workplace computer obtained in violation of his s. 8 Charter rights.
He also challenged the Crown's closing address, alleged factual errors in the jury charge, and complained about a summary chart of victim statements.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's s. 24(2) Grant analysis, which correctly assessed the privacy impact of the computer search as minimal.
The court also rejected the appellant's other grounds, finding no prejudice from the Crown's address, the minor jury charge error, or the evidentiary chart.
Coroners lack statutory authority to inquire into or remedy the composition of the jury roll.
The applicants sought judicial review of decisions by two coroners refusing to issue a summons to a government official to testify about the composition of the jury roll in the Thunder Bay district, specifically regarding the representation of First Nations individuals.
The Divisional Court dismissed the applications, holding that coroners have no statutory authority under the Coroners Act to inquire into or remedy the process used by the sheriff to compile the jury roll under the Juries Act.
The court found no jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice in the coroners' refusals.
