The appellant, Kevin Hanse, appealed his convictions for two firearm offences (attempting to obtain possession of a firearm and transferring ammunition) and his sentence.
The Crown's case relied heavily on wiretap evidence, with the defence challenging the admissibility of expert and lay witness testimony regarding code words for firearms and marijuana.
The appellant also sought to introduce fresh post-sentencing evidence concerning a workplace injury and argued the trial judge erred in assessing aggravating factors and imposing a consecutive sentence for a marijuana trafficking offence to which he had pleaded guilty.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both the conviction and sentence appeals, upholding the trial judge's evidentiary rulings and finding no error in the sentencing principles or the fitness of the sentence.
