James D. Harbic

The Crown appealed the youth's acquittals for human trafficking and living on the avails of prostitution, while the youth cross-appealed his convictions for assault and breach of an undertaking.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal, finding the trial judge erred by applying a subjective standard to the definition of exploitation and by concluding a single act could not constitute prostitution.

The youth's cross-appeal was dismissed as the trial judge's credibility findings and verdicts were reasonable.

A new trial was ordered on the trafficking and prostitution charges.

The young person appealed his convictions for possession of a weapon for the purpose of robbery and robbery with a weapon, as well as his sentence of nine months' custody and 12 months' probation.

The appellant argued the trial judge erred in assessing the complainant's credibility and that the verdict was unreasonable.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding the trial judge properly applied credibility principles and relied on corroborating independent evidence.

The sentence appeal was also dismissed, as the trial judge adequately considered the principles of the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the sentence was fit for a serious firearm offence.