L. Sossin J.A.

The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual offences against children, which arose from guilty pleas.

He argued the pleas were involuntary due to pressure after his trial counsel was released and his adjournment request was denied, leaving him to face self-representation.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant failed to overcome the strong presumption that guilty pleas made in open court are voluntary.

The court held that emotional pressure and fear of self-representation did not impair his ability to make a conscious volitional choice.

The appellant appealed jury convictions for historical sexual offences against a family member, alleging errors in the jury charge concerning the W.(D.) framework, eyewitness identification, and defence submissions about recovered memory.

He also sought to file fresh evidence consisting of a post-verdict juror Facebook message and a foreperson's note to argue a reasonable apprehension of jury bias.

The court held that the charge, read as a whole, adequately instructed the jury on reasonable doubt and the frailties of identification evidence, and that the trial judge's narrow corrective instruction on recovered memory was proper.

Although the fresh evidence was admitted because it bore on trial fairness, it did not rebut the presumption of juror impartiality.

The appeal was dismissed.