Linda Shin

The appellant was convicted of sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching following a judge-alone trial.

The complainant was the appellant's stepdaughter, and the alleged abuse occurred over a ten-year period.

The appellant's primary defence was that he was never alone with the complainant and therefore had no opportunity to commit the offences.

The trial judge rejected this defence after the complainant's mother admitted the appellant had been alone with the complainant on occasion.

The appellant also argued the complainant had a motive to fabricate the allegations based on conflicts over chores and living arrangements.

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

The appellant appealed her sentence for abduction of a child in contravention of a court order.

The appellant had removed her twin children from school in violation of a court-ordered access schedule, driving aggressively to evade the complainant (the children's father).

She pleaded guilty and received a suspended sentence.

On appeal, she argued the sentencing judge erred by considering her prior wrongdoing as an aggravating factor and by emphasizing general deterrence over her specific circumstances.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the sentencing judge was entitled to consider the appellant's course of conduct in determining whether a discharge would be contrary to the public interest, and was entitled to find that a conditional discharge was not appropriate given the aggravated manner of the offense.

The offender pleaded guilty to historical offences of break and enter and sexual assault with a weapon committed in 1998, after being linked by DNA evidence in 2013.

The Crown sought a penitentiary sentence of four years, characterizing the offence as a home invasion, while the defence sought a non-custodial or conditional sentence.

The court considered the offender's significant Gladue factors, his extensive rehabilitation efforts over the past five years, and the profound impact on the victim.

The court distinguished the case from typical home invasions and sentenced the offender to two years less a day in custody followed by three years of probation.

The accused was convicted by a jury of four counts of fraud over $5,000 and two counts of possession of proceeds of crime after receiving and withdrawing funds transferred from a large-scale electronic fraud targeting a construction company.

Approximately $14,937 was deposited into the accused’s bank accounts and quickly withdrawn through ATM and point-of-sale transactions.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the scale and sophistication of the broader fraud scheme, as well as the accused’s significant criminal record.

Although a conditional sentence was legally available, the court found that a custodial sentence was required to achieve specific deterrence.

The accused was sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment followed by two years’ probation, with restitution ordered to the corporate victims.