George Filipovic

The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in relying on the uncorroborated evidence of a single witness who had a self-interest in implicating him.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge was aware of the need for caution and properly weighed the witness's inconsistencies, timing of statements, and relationship with the appellant.

The court concluded the verdict was not unreasonable and dismissed the appeal.

The young person appealed his conviction for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death.

The appellant argued that the legal chain of causation was broken by a mechanic who had improperly certified the vehicle's defective brakes as safe a month prior to the collision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant's dangerous driving was a contributing cause of the cyclist's death outside the de minimis range, and that the mechanic's certification did not sever the causal connection.

The court also found the trial judge's reasons on causation were adequate.

The appellant appealed a conviction entered by the Superior Court of Justice, challenging the legality of a search.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in a brief endorsement, holding that whether viewed as a section 8 Charter issue or a search incident to arrest, the appeal could not succeed.

The appellant appealed his drug-related conviction on the sole ground that the trial judge failed to warn the jury not to engage in propensity reasoning.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that since identity was the sole issue and all evidence was admissible on all counts, the requested warning would have confused the jury and would not have benefited the appellant.