The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement to the Supreme Court of Canada as of right.
He argued that the majority of the Court of Appeal applied the incorrect standard of review, erred regarding the admissibility of footprint evidence, and erred in finding the trial judge properly applied the reasonable doubt standard from W. (D.).
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the verdict was reasonable, there was no basis to intervene on the evidentiary issue, and the trial judge did not err in applying the reasonable doubt standard to the whole of the evidence.
