2 total
Summary conviction appeal dismissed; trial judge's reasons on s. 10(b) Charter application were sufficient.
The appellant appealed his conviction for driving with a blood alcohol concentration over 80, arguing the trial judge provided insufficient reasons on a s. 10(b) Charter application regarding his right to counsel.
The appellant claimed the trial judge failed to explain why he preferred the police officers' evidence over his own.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge did not make a negative credibility finding, but rather relied on the uncontroverted evidence that the arresting officer read the right to counsel from a card while the appellant was in the police cruiser.
The reasons were deemed sufficient for appellate review.
Convictions and lengthy parole ineligibility periods upheld for grandparents who starved their grandson to death.
The appellants, grandparents and legal guardians of the victims, appealed their convictions for second degree murder and forcible confinement, as well as their respective parole ineligibility periods of 22 and 20 years.
The victims, a five-year-old boy and his six-year-old sister, were subjected to prolonged starvation, abuse, and confinement in a squalid room, resulting in the boy's death.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeals, finding that the trial judge properly inferred the requisite mens rea for murder from the prolonged course of conduct and correctly rejected the defence's expert evidence on diminished capacity.
The court also upheld the admission of police statements and found the confinement vastly exceeded any lawful parental authority.
The sentence appeals were dismissed, with the court affirming that the extreme cruelty and inhumanity of the offences justified the lengthy parole ineligibility periods.
