The appellant, J.R., appealed a conviction for sexual assault, arguing the trial judge erred in finding the touching of the complainant's leg to be of a sexual nature.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's legally and factually sound reasons.
The appellant also raised an issue regarding the complainant's age in institutional records, but the trial judge had already found that the complainant's age (under 18) was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt for sentencing purposes.
The conviction appeal was dismissed.
A publication ban order under ss. 486.4 or 486.6 of the Criminal Code remains in effect.
