The appellant appealed his convictions for firearms offences following a foot chase and altercation with police.
At trial, the jury acquitted him of assaulting police but convicted him of possessing a handgun found at the scene.
The appellant argued the trial judge erred by allowing oath-helping evidence regarding a police officer, permitting cross-examination on his 'Young Thugs' tattoo without a limiting instruction, redacting his medical records to remove his account of how he was injured by police, and improperly handling hearsay evidence of a third party's admission of gun ownership.
The Court of Appeal found that the cumulative effect of the trial judge's errors regarding credibility evidence prejudiced the appellant's right to a fair trial.
The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.
