Dr. Mojab

The appellant was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder after shooting his sister and her fiancé.

At trial, the defence conceded the shootings and intent but argued provocation, while the Crown argued the murders were planned and deliberate 'honour killings'.

The appellant appealed his convictions, arguing the trial judge erred in admitting expert evidence on the cultural context of honour killings and in failing to give a W.D. instruction.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the expert evidence was relevant, balanced, and properly admitted, and that the jury instructions as a whole correctly conveyed the burden of proof without setting up a credibility contest.

The appellant, convicted of two counts of first-degree murder, brought a motion under s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code for the appointment of state-funded counsel for his appeal.

The Court of Appeal found that the appeal raised arguable grounds, including the admissibility of expert evidence on 'honour killings' and the trial judge's refusal to give a modified W.D. instruction.

Given the complexity of the legal issues, the substantial record, and the appellant's limited English language skills, the Court concluded he could not effectively present the appeal without legal assistance.

The motion was granted and counsel was appointed.