The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault and sentence of two years' imprisonment plus one year of probation.
At the appeal hearing, the appellant abandoned his sentence appeal and focused on the conviction appeal.
The appellant contended that the trial judge erred in finding that he was a person in a position of trust within the meaning of s. 273.1(2)(c) of the Criminal Code, arguing that if this finding was incorrect, the complainant could have consented to the sexual activity.
The Court of Appeal rejected this submission, finding that the complainant's clear and uncontradicted testimony established a long-standing relationship of trust and dependency, which the appellant abused.
The appeal was dismissed.
