The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault, sexual interference, and forcible confinement involving a 13-year-old complainant.
The appellant argued that the trial judge erred in his jury instructions regarding the theory of the defence, consent, mistake of age, and reasonable doubt.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge adequately set out the defence's theory, properly instructed the jury on the withdrawal of consent and the objective element of the mistake of age defence, and correctly applied the burden of proof.
The appeal was dismissed.
