Michael William Lacy

The appellant appealed a sexual assault conviction and a nine-month custodial sentence arising from brief acts of sexual intercourse where consent was the sole live issue.

The court held that the trial judge's findings, including the appellant's own admissions, confirmed a lack of consent in relation to the second sexual act.

The conviction appeal was dismissed.

However, given the appellant's youth, lack of record, family support, the short duration of the acts, and the absence of a need for probation, the sentence was found excessive and reduced to six months.

The accused was convicted of fraud relating to a mortgage document.

At trial, the Crown was permitted to call reply evidence concerning the accused's conduct regarding a later mortgage and whether he held himself out as a chartered accountant.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, adopting the dissenting reasons from the Court of Appeal that the Crown was erroneously permitted to call reply evidence in breach of the collateral fact rule.