Scott Wheildon

The appellant was convicted of importing cocaine after 3.7 kilograms of the drug were found concealed in spice packages in his luggage upon arrival from Jamaica.

He appealed, arguing the trial judge applied the wrong standard for wilful blindness, ignored after-the-fact conduct, and improperly took judicial notice of restaurant spice requirements.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge correctly applied the wilful blindness standard as an alternative to her primary finding of actual knowledge, and made no reversible errors in her assessment of the evidence.

The appellant appealed his convictions for firearm offences and his sentence.

At trial, the judge rejected the testimony of a defence witness who claimed ownership of the firearm found in the car driven by the appellant.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's credibility assessment.

However, the sentence appeal was allowed.

The sentencing judge erred by refusing to grant credit for harsh presentence custody conditions (lockdowns) despite agreement between the parties that such credit was warranted.

The Court granted 75 days of additional credit.

The applicant, a lawyer charged with attempting to obstruct justice and perjury, sought production of third-party records held by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC).

The charges arose from her alleged representations about possessing a video recording of a police officer stealing money during a search.

The applicant sought records from three PPSC counsel.

The court applied the first stage of the O'Connor test and found that the records of two PPSC counsel were likely relevant to the charges, ordering them produced for judicial inspection.

The application for records from the third counsel was dismissed without prejudice.