Dawson

The appellant appealed his convictions for threatening death, criminal harassment, and mischief, as well as his suspended sentence and 12 months' probation.

The convictions arose from an incident where the appellant, after receiving a noise complaint, banged on neighbors' doors and threatened to kill them.

The appellant argued the trial judge misapprehended evidence, specifically an iPhone recording that did not capture threats.

The appeal court found no palpable and overriding error, concluding the trial judge's findings were reasonable.

The conviction appeal was dismissed, though a conditional stay was entered for the criminal harassment charges under the Kienapple principle.

The sentence appeal was also dismissed, with a modification to the weapons prohibition from s. 109 to s. 110 of the Criminal Code.

The applicant, charged with passport and immigration offences, brought a pre-trial motion challenging the admissibility of statements and documents obtained by Canada Border Services Agency officers at an airport.

The court found that the applicant was not detained and voluntarily provided documents prior to 8:00 p.m., rendering that evidence admissible.

However, after 8:00 p.m., the officers conducted a warrantless search of the applicant's wallet that exceeded his consent, and detained him without providing rights to counsel.

Applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2) of the Charter, the court excluded the documents found in the wallet and the subsequent statements, finding serious Charter breaches that undermined the applicant's rights.

During a joint trial for the murder of a child, the co-accused's counsel produced previously undisclosed photographs depicting the victim chained to a bed.

The applicant sought a severance of his trial, arguing the late disclosure undermined his cross-examination strategy and created fundamental unfairness.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the late production was a natural response to the applicant's cutthroat defence tactics and did not violate Crown disclosure obligations or create an injustice requiring separate trials.