Trudy Mauth

The prosecution brought an application to elicit similar act evidence from a prior incident where the accused was originally charged with sexual assault but pleaded guilty to common assault.

The prosecution sought to call the prior complainant to testify that the assault was sexual in nature.

The court held that issue estoppel applies equally to acquittals flowing from a trial and those resulting from a guilty plea.

Because the accused was acquitted of sexual assault in the prior proceeding, the absence of a sexual element was conclusively determined in his favour.

The application was dismissed.

The defendant was charged with impaired driving causing bodily harm after a single-vehicle accident where his car struck a house, injuring his passenger.

The Crown presented evidence of the defendant's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) and the circumstances of the accident, including his attempt to hide beer bottles.

The defence argued a Charter s. 10(b) breach regarding privacy during legal consultation at the hospital and offered an alternative explanation for the accident involving the passenger grabbing the steering wheel due to a cat on the road.

The court dismissed the Charter argument, finding police took reasonable steps for privacy in an emergency setting.

The court also rejected the defence's explanation for the accident, finding the passenger's testimony unreliable and accepting her prior inconsistent statement to a witness as substantive evidence.

The court concluded that the defendant's ability to operate the vehicle was impaired by alcohol, which was a significant contributing cause of the accident and the passenger's injuries, and found the defendant guilty.