M. Catzman

The Crown appealed a summary conviction appeal decision that overturned the accused's conviction.

The summary conviction appeal judge had found that the trial judge erred in admitting the certificate of a qualified technician, applying the criminal standard of proof to whether the accused received a true copy under s. 258(7) of the Criminal Code.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the standard of proof for admissibility under s. 258(7) is a balance of probabilities.

The arresting officer's evidence that he read through the copy to ensure it matched the original was sufficient to support the trial judge's finding.

The conviction and sentence were restored.

The appellant appealed his conviction.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's findings of credibility were inconsistent, particularly given the complainant was a self-admitted manipulator and liar who had previously concocted a story of physical abuse.

The Court also found the trial judge's identification and analysis of corroborative evidence was flawed.

The appeal was allowed, the conviction set aside, and a new trial ordered.