The appellant appealed his conviction for attempting to obstruct justice contrary to s. 139(2) of the Criminal Code.
The conviction arose from allegations that while in custody, the appellant wrote letters to another inmate requesting false evidence concerning prior convictions.
The trial judge convicted the appellant despite the loss of the original letters prior to the re-trial.
The appellant raised three grounds of appeal: (1) the trial judge shifted the burden of proof when assessing the evidence of the key witness; (2) the trial judge failed to properly apply Vetrovec principles regarding the credibility of an unsavoury witness; and (3) the trial judge erred in dismissing the stay application based on the prejudice caused by the loss of the original letters.
The Court of Appeal dismissed all grounds of appeal and upheld the conviction.
