The accused, charged with sexual assault, sought to confirm his right to a trial by judge and jury.
The Crown argued that the accused must be tried by judge alone because the Crown had not expressly consented to the accused's re-election to a jury trial at the assignment court.
The Superior Court of Justice held that the Crown's conduct at the assignment court, where the Crown Attorney actively participated in scheduling a jury trial without objection, constituted a clear and unequivocal waiver of the procedural requirement for express consent.
The court confirmed the accused's right to a trial by judge and jury.
