R. Levan

The accused, charged with multiple firearms and stolen vehicle offences, sought a bail review under s. 520 and s. 525 of the Criminal Code after being detained on the tertiary ground.

The accused proposed a new release plan involving his father, a correctional officer residing in New Brunswick, as a surety.

The court found that the new release plan constituted a material change in circumstances and that the Crown had not shown that continued detention was necessary to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice.

The accused was granted interim judicial release on strict conditions, including house arrest and significant financial pledges from sureties.

The appellant, an inmate, appealed his convictions for weapons dangerous and possession of a concealed weapon, as well as his five-month concurrent sentences.

He argued the trial judge failed to consider alternative rational explanations for his possession of a knife hidden in his cell door frame.

He also argued his sentence should be reduced to a discharge to prevent his prior youth record for murder from converting to an adult record under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no other rational explanation for possessing the knife.

The sentence appeal was also dismissed, as a discharge would be markedly disproportionate to the gravity of possessing a weapon in a correctional facility and during transport.

The appellant appealed his conviction for dangerous driving, arguing that the trial judge failed to provide adequate reasons by not resolving evidentiary conflicts regarding his speed, the duration of the police pursuit, his lane position, and the presence of pedestrians.

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the evidentiary conflicts were insignificant in the context of the formidable Crown case.

The trial judge's conclusion that driving at night on the shoulder of a major highway past stopped traffic constituted a marked departure from the standard of a reasonable driver was well-supported and the path to this conclusion was clear.