Latoya Graham

This is the third appeal brought by the respondent in a family law proceeding concerning equalization payments and the sale of the matrimonial home.

The appellant sought to appeal an order of eviction from the matrimonial home and a power of sale granted by the trial judge due to the appellant's intransigence in the sale process.

The appellant also appealed a costs award of $36,000.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of the eviction and power of sale order as an abuse of process, noting it was an attempt to circumvent two previous appeals that had been dismissed for delay.

The appeal was also found to be moot as the matrimonial home had already been sold.

The costs appeal was dismissed as the trial judge committed no reviewable error in awarding substantial indemnity costs based on the appellant's unreasonable conduct.

The offender was convicted after trial of aggravated assault for stabbing an unarmed man in the upper chest within two seconds of the start of a consensual fight.

The victim suffered a collapsed lung requiring hospitalization.

The offender had no prior criminal record at the time of the offence but had subsequent convictions for violent offences.

The sentencing hearing was protracted, involving psychiatric and psychological assessments that revealed significant intellectual deficits, personality disorders with antisocial and borderline features, and a moderately high risk of violent reoffending.

The court imposed a sentence below the typical range for such offences, considering the offender's rehabilitative potential, intellectual limitations, and family support.

A youth, aged 17 at the time of the offences, pleaded guilty to procuring under section 212 of the Criminal Code, making child pornography under section 163.1, making available child pornography under section 163.1(3), and attempting to procure a person to become a prostitute under section 212(1)(d).

The youth recruited three young women aged 16 to work as prostitutes, took suggestive photographs, posted them on the internet, fixed prices for sexual acts, and collected money from the women.

The court imposed a 24-month probation sentence with conditions rather than custody, considering the youth's strong family support, genuine remorse, guilty pleas, counselling efforts, community involvement, and rehabilitation potential against the serious nature of the exploitation offences.