Court File and Parties

Court File No.: 23-11402146 Date: 2025-09-04 Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Re: His Majesty the King – and – Joshua Hambleton, Appellant

Supplementary Reasons for Decision on Summary Conviction Appeal

Justice: I. Carter

Decision

[1] On August 11, 2025 I allowed an appeal brought by Joshua Hambleton, set aside the convictions and ordered a new trial. Shortly thereafter Crown counsel sent a letter to the Court seeking clarification that the new trial would be on all the counts on the information, including the two acquittals that were not appealed. Mr. Hambleton provided a letter in response.

[2] I would begin by noting that if a party to an appeal seeks clarification about a ruling, the proper procedure to follow is to write to the Court seeking leave to make further submissions on the issue. That said, both the Crown and the Appellant have provided their submissions in the form of the letters that were sent. In the interest of time and efficiency, I will proceed on that basis. Given that no formal order has been prepared and signed, the Court has jurisdiction to provide clarification in the form of these brief written reasons.

[3] The Crown submits that in accordance with R. v. Curragh Inc., [1997] 1 SCR 537, the finding of reasonable apprehension of bias retroactively renders all the decisions and orders made during the trial void and without effect, which would include the acquittals.

[4] I decline to accept this submission.

[5] Writing for the majority, LaForest and Cory JJ. stated that "generally" the decision reached and the orders made in the course of a trial that is found by a court of appeal to be unfair as a result of bias are void and unenforceable (para. 7). The use of the word "generally" suggests that there may be circumstances where not all decisions will be held to be void. It is of note that the issue of whether acquittals entered by a trial judge in a circumstance where a reasonable apprehension of bias towards the accused person has been found on appeal was not specifically addressed by the Supreme Court.

[6] In the very unique circumstances of this case, I conclude that the acquittals are not void. First, the Crown did not appeal the acquittals. Second, there was no concern of an apprehension of bias with respect to the Crown. Third, the Crown did not raise this issue at the hearing of the appeal.

[7] The acquittals remain in force. Mr. Hambleton is to be retried only on the counts on which he was found guilty by the trial judge.

Justice I. Carter

Released: September 4, 2025