Michelle Fuerst

The Member, a registered nurse, admitted to engaging in a sexual relationship with a psychiatric patient while employed at a hospital.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct by sexually abusing the patient and violating professional boundaries.

The Member brought a Charter challenge, arguing that the mandatory revocation penalty discriminated against her on the basis of a mental disability.

The panel dismissed the Charter challenge, finding insufficient evidence that the Member suffered from a mental disability that affected her functioning at the time of the misconduct.

The panel ordered the mandatory penalty of revocation of the Member's certificate of registration and a reprimand.

The respondent, charged with arson, brought a pre-trial motion for a stay of proceedings alleging abuse of process due to an insurance company's involvement in the criminal investigation.

The trial judge refused the stay but excluded wiretap evidence and ordered the Crown to pay approximately $150,000 in costs forthwith.

The Crown appealed the costs order.

The Court of Appeal held that the Crown had the right to appeal the costs order immediately under s. 676.1 of the Criminal Code.

The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the costs order, finding that the trial judge should not have determined the issue of costs or the abuse of process application until the conclusion of the trial, as the actual benefit of the exclusionary remedy to the defence could only be assessed at that time.

The appellant appealed sentence following convictions for multiple sexual offences committed against four very young boys over several years while occupying positions of trust.

The court rejected the submission that a six-year sentence in an earlier authority represented the high-water mark for prolonged child sexual abuse cases.

It held that where an adult in a position of trust regularly abuses young children over a substantial period, mid to upper single-digit penitentiary terms are generally appropriate, and where the abuse includes intercourse, violence, threats, or extortion, upper single-digit to low double-digit terms will generally be fit.

Given the repeated anal intercourse, threats, extortion, physical violence, grooming, and devastating victim impact, the sentence imposed was at the lower end of the appropriate range.

Leave to appeal sentence was granted, but the sentence appeal was dismissed.

The respondent was convicted of possessing contraband tobacco under the Excise Act and was subject to a mandatory minimum fine of $9,600.

Finding the respondent unable to pay, the trial judge gave no time to pay and imposed a 75-day conditional sentence in default of payment.

The Crown appealed, arguing a conditional sentence is not available in default of payment of a fine.

The Court of Appeal (majority) dismissed the appeal, holding that where an offender is given no time to pay a fine, the resulting immediate committal constitutes a sentence of imprisonment for which a conditional sentence may be imposed under s. 742.1 of the Criminal Code.

The appellant appealed his convictions for assault, sexual assault, forcible confinement, and related offences, as well as his six-year sentence.

He argued the trial judge erred in providing jury instructions in instalments, misdirecting on reasonable doubt, admitting expert and bad character evidence, and refusing a mistrial after inflammatory Crown remarks.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's corrected instructions on reasonable doubt were sufficient, the evidence was properly admitted or cured by instructions, and the sentence was appropriate given the violent and degrading nature of the offences committed while on probation.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a Registered Practical Nurse for professional misconduct.

The nurse admitted to suggesting that two psychiatric clients be locked in a special observation room, failing to intervene when the clients barricaded the door, and failing to document the events.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and found the nurse committed professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered a reprimand and imposed conditions on the nurse's certificate of registration, including completing a psychiatric nursing assessment course and viewing an abuse prevention video, but declined to impose a suspension.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for violating professional boundaries with a forensic mental health patient.

The Member admitted to maintaining a friendship, visiting, loaning money, and conducting banking transactions for the patient over several years, despite previous warnings from her employer and the College.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Member committed professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a nine-month suspension, a reprimand, and the completion of a remedial workbook on therapeutic boundaries.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse for professional misconduct involving inappropriate and unwelcome physical contact with several co-workers.

The Member admitted to the allegations, acknowledging that while the touching was not sexual in intent, it was unwelcome and unprofessional.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission as to Penalty, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Member was ordered to appear for an oral reprimand and to complete mandatory counselling regarding boundary violations.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse for professional misconduct.

While working a night shift at a psychiatric hospital, the nurse learned that two patients had been locked in a special observation room by other staff and had barricaded the door.

The nurse failed to investigate, intervene, assess the patients' mental status, or document the events.

The nurse admitted to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the nurse guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, remedial coursework, and performance reports.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse for professional misconduct.

While working the night shift at a psychiatric hospital, the nurse learned that two patients had been locked in a special observation room by other staff and had barricaded the door.

The nurse failed to investigate, intervene, assess the patients' mental status, or properly document the incident.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Fact and a joint submission on penalty, finding the nurse guilty of professional misconduct and ordering a reprimand along with remedial conditions on her certificate of registration.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for sexually abusing a psychotherapy client and failing to maintain professional boundaries.

The Member admitted to the allegations, which included hugging, kissing, and fondling the client, and continuing the therapeutic relationship despite the client's romantic attachment.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Fact and found the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

A Joint Submission on Penalty was accepted, resulting in a three-month suspension, an oral reprimand, and a two-year restriction requiring supervised practice.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against a registered nurse for allegedly striking a psychiatric patient and falsifying the patient's records to conceal the incident.

The Discipline Committee found that the College failed to prove the nurse deliberately struck the patient, as the contact may have been defensive.

However, the Committee found the nurse guilty of professional misconduct for deliberately falsifying clinical records and incident reports to hide his involvement in the altercation.

The nurse's certificate of registration was suspended for 15 months, with conditions for practice monitoring upon return to employment.

The appellant, who had suffered years of severe abuse from her common law husband, shot and killed him.

At trial, she relied primarily on self-defence and led expert evidence that she suffered from battered woman syndrome.

She was convicted of second degree murder.

On appeal, she argued that the trial judge failed to adequately instruct the jury on how the expert evidence related to the law of self-defence.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that while the jury charge was not perfect, it adequately conveyed the principles from R. v. Lavallee and left the jury with a sufficient understanding of how the battered woman syndrome evidence applied to the elements of self-defence.

The appellants were convicted of second degree murder.

The Crown's case relied heavily on the testimony of two unsavoury witnesses who had strong motivations to lie.

The trial judge failed to give a clear, sharp Vetrovec warning regarding their testimony, failed to instruct the jury on the limited use of a highly prejudicial letter written by one of the witnesses, and failed to instruct the jury on the use of prior inconsistent statements.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeals and ordered a new trial, finding that the cumulative effect of these errors could not be cured by the proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code, as there was a reasonable possibility the verdict would have been different but for the errors.