The appellant, convicted of aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to ten years' incarceration, appealed both the conviction and sentence.
The conviction appeal was based on claims of ineffective trial counsel, including failures in cross-examination, calling witnesses, eliciting expert opinion, and exploring photo tampering, as well as suggestions of improper discussions and conflict of interest.
The sentence appeal argued the trial judge erred in treating lack of remorse as an aggravating factor and in identifying primary sentencing objectives inconsistent with Gladue factors.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no basis for incompetence and noting the strong Crown case supported by forensic evidence.
It also dismissed the sentence appeal, finding that even if the trial judge erred regarding remorse, it had no impact given other serious aggravating factors, and that deterrence and denunciation were appropriate objectives.
