Keith E. Wright

The appellant, Shawn Orange, appealed his convictions for dangerous driving causing bodily harm and failing to remain at the scene of an accident.

The primary ground of appeal was that the transcript of the trial judge's oral reasons was uncertified due to alleged substantive changes by the judge.

The Court of Appeal rejected this, finding the transcript accurate and the judge's edits permissible within the scope allowed for trial judges.

The court also dismissed alternative grounds of appeal, finding the trial judge's factual and credibility findings amply supported by the evidence.

The appeal from convictions was dismissed.

The appeal from sentence was allowed by consent to subtract time spent on bail pending appeal from the driving prohibition.

The appellant was convicted of sexual assault following a judge-alone trial.

The trial judge found the complainant's evidence credible and rejected the appellant's testimony that the sexual activity was consensual.

On appeal, the appellant raised six grounds of appeal challenging the conviction.

While the Court of Appeal rejected the first three grounds (misapplication of burden of proof, improper use of silence, and improper use of lack of embellishment), it allowed the appeal on three remaining grounds: the trial judge's failure to inspect the complainant's shirt despite defence counsel's reasonable expectation that he would do so; the trial judge's erroneous admission and use of reply evidence from the appellant's roommate to establish a collusion theory without proper foundation; and most significantly, the trial judge's application of markedly different levels of scrutiny to the credibility of the complainant and the appellant.

The Court found that cumulatively, these errors undermined the fairness of the trial and constituted a miscarriage of justice.