103 total
Conviction appeal for historical sexual offences dismissed; Crown cross-appeal granted to impose consecutive sentence.
The appellant appealed his convictions and sentence for historical sexual offences against his two step-daughters.
He argued the trial judge erred by admitting the complainants' testimony as similar fact evidence without prior notice and by failing to specifically instruct the jury on collusion.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no prejudice from the lack of notice and concluding the jury was adequately alive to the defence theory of collusion.
The appellant's sentence appeal seeking a conditional sentence was dismissed.
The Crown's cross-appeal was granted, varying the sentence to make one of the indecent assault terms consecutive.
Crown appeals allowed; DNA data bank orders issued for five offenders due to trial judges' errors.
The Crown appealed the refusal of trial judges to make DNA data bank orders for five adult offenders.
The Court of Appeal held that the appeal route follows the general scheme of the Criminal Code and that the standard of review is one of deference absent an error in principle.
The Court found that the DNA data bank provisions apply retrospectively to offenders still before the court after the legislation came into force.
The Court allowed the appeals, finding that the trial judges misapprehended the broad purposes of the DNA data bank, placed unreasonable emphasis on the offenders' privacy, and failed to properly weigh the offenders' criminal records and the nature of their offences.
DNA data bank orders were issued for all five offenders.
Harassment sentence increased to reflect denunciation and deterrence.
The Crown appealed a sentence imposed following guilty pleas to multiple offences arising from prolonged domestic harassment, break and enter, threats, and related misconduct.
The Court of Appeal held that the sentencing judge erred in principle by underemphasizing denunciation and deterrence and by relying on an inaccurate understanding of the respondent's prior record.
Applying the sentencing principles emphasized in harassment jurisprudence, the court held that the absence of physical violence was not a mitigating factor for criminal harassment.
Leave to appeal sentence was granted, the appeal allowed, and the total sentence increased to four years.