Maureen D. Forestell

The appellant appealed his sexual assault conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in rejecting his evidence, treating the aunt's evidence improperly, and providing inadequate reasons under Sheppard.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's credibility assessments, which properly considered demeanour and common sense without engaging in propensity reasoning.

The court also held that any discrepancies in the evidence did not affect the core issue of consent, and the reasons for judgment were sufficient.

The appellant appealed his perjury conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in refusing to allow him to re-elect trial by judge and jury after a mistrial.

The appellant claimed a substantial change in the Crown's case justified overriding the Crown's refusal to consent to the late re-election.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the trial judge that there was no substantial change in the Crown's case and noting the attempted re-election was out of time without a satisfactory explanation.

The appellant appealed his sentence, acknowledging it was fit when imposed but seeking intervention based on fresh evidence regarding his medical condition.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant could serve his sentence without any impairment to his medical condition and treatment.