The appellant, Robert Casarsa, appealed his conviction for two counts of sexual assault and sought leave to appeal his sentence.
The conviction appeal raised issues regarding the trial judge's assessment of collusion risk between complainants and the alleged reversal of the onus of proof concerning corroborating evidence.
The sentence appeal sought to introduce fresh evidence of job loss and challenged the denial of a conditional sentence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both the conviction and sentence appeals, finding no material errors in the trial judge's reasoning on conviction and concluding that the fresh evidence or conditional sentence arguments would not have altered the imposed sentence.
