Dr. Komer

The appellant appealed his designation as a long-term offender and his sentence of 8.5 years imprisonment followed by 8 years of community supervision for 17 predicate offences, including arson and harassment.

He argued that the assessing psychiatrist improperly relied on a police statement that had been ruled inadmissible at trial due to a Charter breach.

The Court of Appeal held that while the statement should not have been considered, the error was trivial and did not affect the outcome, applying the proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii).

The court also upheld the sentence, finding that the custodial term and community supervision serve discrete purposes and were not disproportionate.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Ontario Review Board ordering his transfer from a medium security facility to a maximum security facility (Oak Ridge).

The appellant conceded he posed a significant threat to public safety but argued the Board unreasonably assessed issues of risk and trust.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Board's decision was reasonably supported by uncontradicted expert evidence regarding the appellant's lack of progress, risk level, and need for a highly structured environment.