Randolv Schwartz

The appellant appealed his first degree murder conviction, arguing the trial judge erred by admitting evidence of two loaded handguns seized from him that were unconnected to the murder, and by instructing the jury that this evidence could confirm the testimony of a Vetrovec witness (a jailhouse informant).

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the firearms evidence was relevant to the appellant's knowledge of the murder weapons and properly admitted with a limiting instruction.

The Court also held the evidence was capable of confirming the informant's testimony, as it was independent and increased confidence in the witness's reliability.

The appellant was convicted of sexually assaulting his young niece.

The complainant disclosed the assaults several years later, and her testimony was uncorroborated.

The trial judge convicted the appellant, and the majority of the Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, with one judge dissenting on the basis that the verdict was unreasonable.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge was entitled to believe the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant and that the verdict was reasonable and supported by the evidence.