Lane Wiegers

The accused was convicted of second degree murder based largely on the testimony of a jailhouse informant who claimed the accused admitted to wiping down the crime scene to remove DNA.

The trial judge gave a Vetrovec warning but failed to mention the informant's potential motives to lie, such as a reward and pending charges.

The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to the inadequate warning.

The Crown appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the accused sought to introduce fresh DNA evidence showing his DNA on additional items in the room, contradicting the wiping down theory.

The Supreme Court admitted the fresh evidence, finding it could reasonably have affected the jury's assessment of the informant's credibility, and dismissed the Crown's appeal, affirming the order for a new trial.

The applicant sought an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal a decision of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan.

The application was filed four months after the expiry of the 60-day statutory deadline.

The applicant's counsel explained the delay was due to a senior partner's motorcycle accident, another lawyer's maternity leave, and resulting workload increases.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the motion, finding that while the applicant had a bona fide intention to appeal, the four-month delay was lengthy and not adequately explained, as counsel failed to accord necessary priority to the application.