M. Halfyard

The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault, sexual interference, and breach of probation involving a 9-year-old complainant.

The central issue on appeal was whether the trial judge committed a 'Miller error' in applying the W. (D.) framework for assessing credibility by allegedly ignoring evidence that was neither accepted nor rejected.

The Superior Court of Justice found that the trial judge properly applied the burden of proof and did not err in his credibility assessment.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, a kickboxing coach, appealed his convictions for sexual assault and sexual interference against his 14-year-old student.

The offences occurred on an airplane flight.

The appellant argued the trial judge misapprehended evidence regarding the complainant's disclosure to her therapist, improperly bolstered her reliability based on a lack of motive to fabricate, and improperly used evidence of their relationship as propensity evidence.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no misapprehension of evidence, no improper bolstering of reliability, and that the trial judge properly considered the relationship evidence to assess the appellant's state of mind.

The appellant appealed his conviction for operating a motor vehicle over the legal limit, arguing the arresting officer lacked reasonable suspicion to make an Approved Screening Device (ASD) demand, failed to make the demand 'forthwith', and violated his s. 10(b) Charter rights.

The summary conviction appeal judge upheld the trial judge's findings that the inexperienced officer's suspicion crystallized after conducting computer checks, justifying the brief delay.

The court found the demand was made forthwith once reasonable suspicion was formed, and thus the suspension of the right to counsel was lawful.

The appeal was dismissed.