Paul Blais

On a bail review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code, the applicant challenged her continued detention on secondary and tertiary grounds arising from allegations connected to child sexual abuse and child pornography offences.

The court held that fresh evidence from the co-accused's guilty plea, the co-accused's affidavit, a new proposed surety, and evidence concerning the applicant's custodial circumstances met the Palmer criteria and constituted a material change in circumstances under the St. Cloud framework.

The court accepted that the new evidence materially affected the assessment of risk by providing corroborative evidence of coercion, abuse, and manipulation within the relationship.

Applying the principle of restraint, the court found the residual risk could be managed through strict release terms, including house arrest and tightly controlled access restrictions involving children.

The application was granted and release ordered on conditions.

Kirsten Pemberton pleaded guilty to infanticide and concealing the dead body of her child.

The court considered sentencing principles, including denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation, particularly in light of the diminished moral blameworthiness recognized for infanticide due to a disturbed mind.

The court also addressed credit for pre-trial custody and strict bail conditions.

A conditional sentence of one year for infanticide and six months concurrently for concealment was imposed, followed by two years of probation and a 20-year common law peace bond requiring notification of future pregnancies and medical care.

The appellant, a home care provider, was convicted of defrauding an elderly couple of over $35,000 and sentenced to 14 months' imprisonment.

She appealed her conviction and sentence, arguing that her s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time was infringed by a 33-month delay, and that the trial judge erred in admitting hearsay statements from the deceased complainants.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's s. 11(b) analysis or his admission of the hearsay evidence based on necessity and reliability.

The sentence appeal was also dismissed, as the trial judge's allocation of pre-sentence credit was within his discretion and the sentence was fit given the significant breach of trust.

The appellant was detained under the Mental Health Act after police concluded she was suicidal.

While she was at the hospital, police conducted a warrantless search of her home under s. 117.04(2) of the Criminal Code and seized her properly stored firearms.

The application judge granted a forfeiture order, which was upheld by the summary conviction appeal judge.

On further appeal, the appellant argued the warrantless search was invalid and violated her s. 8 Charter rights, thereby depriving the application judge of jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the possibility of danger persisted despite her hospital detention, making it impracticable to obtain a warrant.

The search was lawful and reasonable, and the forfeiture order was supported by the evidence.