R. v. K.Q.S.
The trial judge did not commit legal error in assessing inconsistencies or delayed disclosure; her credibility and factual findings stand and the 5-year global custodial sentence is fit given the egregious sexual interference and assault of a young person, therefore convictions and sentence are upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2025 ONCA 237
- Parties
- Respondent: His Majesty the King; Appellant: K.Q.S.
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 26 March 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Convictions and Sentence (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed; 5-year global custodial sentence affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, Delayed Disclosure, Sentence Review, Publication Ban
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
His Majesty the King
Respondent
K.Q.S.
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Convictions and Sentence (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether trial judge failed to consider totality of the evidence in light of alleged inconsistencies in complainant's accounts
- 2 Whether trial judge erred in treatment of delayed disclosure of one event
- 3 Whether the 5-year global custodial sentence was fit and within range
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge did not commit legal error in assessing inconsistencies or delayed disclosure; her credibility and factual findings stand and the 5-year global custodial sentence is fit given the egregious sexual interference and assault of a young person, therefore convictions and sentence are upheld.
Court Disposition
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed; 5-year global custodial sentence affirmed.
Orders
- Conviction appeal dismissed.
- Leave to appeal sentence granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. K.Q.S. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2025-03-26 Neutral citation 2025 ONCA 237 Docket numbers COA-23-CR-0074 Judges Fairburn, J. Michal; Hourigan, C. William; Huscroft, Grant Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. K.Q.S., 2025 ONCA 237[1] DATE: 20250326 DOCKET: COA-23-CR-0074 Fairburn A.C.J.O., Hourigan and Huscroft JJ.A. BETWEEN His Majesty the King Respondent and K.Q.S. Appellant K.Q.S., acting in person Sonya Shikhman, appearing as duty counsel Frank Au, for the respondent Heard and released orally: September 11, 2024 On appeal from the convictions entered by Justice Laurie Lacelle of the Superior Court of Justice on July 15, 2022, and from the sentence imposed on December 9, 2022. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The appellant was convicted of sexual interference and sexual assault. He was sentenced to a global sentence of 5 years in custody. He appeals from conviction and sentence. [2] On the conviction appeal, he claims that the trial judge’s reasons reveal two errors. One, a failure to consider the totality of the evidence against what are said to have been inconsistencies in the witness’s accounts. Two, how she treated delayed disclosure in relation to one of the events. [3] We see no error in the trial judge’s careful and thorough approach in her reasons for judgment on these issues and more generally. [4] As for the sentence appeal, the sentence imposed was entirely fit. This was an egregious offence involving a young person sexually interfered with in what should have been the safety of her own home. Despite the appellant’s lack of criminal record, we see this sentence as fit and within the range. [5] The conviction appeal is dismissed. Leave to appeal sentence is granted. The sentence appeal is dismissed. “Fairburn A.C.J.O.” “C.W. Hourigan J.A.” “Grant Huscroft J.A.” [1] This appeal is subject to a publication ban pursuant to s. 486.4 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.