Irina Ceric

The appellant appealed his conviction for abduction of a child under 14 contrary to s. 283 of the Criminal Code.

He argued the trial judge failed to adequately weigh the complainant's inconsistent evidence, reversed the burden of proof, and erred in applying the defence of consent.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge was entitled to accept the complainant's explanation for inconsistencies, properly applied the burden of proof, and correctly concluded there was no air of reality to the defence of lack of intent to deprive.

The appellant was convicted of importing heroin after customs officers found over a kilogram of the drug in his shoes upon his return from Ghana.

On appeal, he argued the trial judge erred by allowing the Crown to introduce evidence of his receipt of Employment Insurance benefits to establish a financial motive, claiming it amounted to propensity reasoning based on poverty.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding the financial evidence was properly admitted to show financial pressure rather than propensity, and that a flawed jury instruction on evaluating evidence did not mislead the jury.

However, the sentence appeal was allowed, as the trial judge erred in treating the appellant's role as a courier as an aggravating factor.

The sentence was reduced to seven years and three and one-half months.