Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
On sentence appeal in a sexual interference case, the Court upheld the 17-month custodial term but varied an overbroad s. 161(1) order.
Ontario Court of Appeal upheld convictions for human trafficking, threats, assault and drug trafficking, rejecting evidentiary, fairness and Browne v. Dunn arguments.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the Crown’s appeal from acquittals, finding no error of law in the trial judge’s credibility, reliability, or reasonable-doubt analysis.
The Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused posted the intimate images to FetLife because there was no forensic or account evidence linking the Accused to the FetLife account, the photographic exhibits were blurred and non‑identifying, and the complainant's testimony contained material inconsistencies and indications of possible motive to fabricate; those deficiencies left reasonable doubt as to identity and publication by the Accused and required acquittal.
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a conviction for the May 2023 sexual assault, finding no reversible misapprehension of evidence or insufficiency of reasons.
After applying Friesen and Sheppard, weighing aggravating factors (young victim, father‑daughter trust, duration, frequency, escalation to penetration, severe psychological harm, confinement) against mitigation (first offender, pro‑social history, compliance with conditions, health issues), the court imposed an aggregate custodial sentence of eight years (individual sentences: s.155 incest 10 years; s.151 sexual interference 7 years concurrent; s.173(2) indecent act 2 years concurrent; s.279(2) unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent, reduced to 8 years for totality) and granted the Crown's a…
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a conviction appeal in a sexual interference case, finding the jury was properly instructed on reasonable doubt and no further limiting instruction was required.
Appeal allowed and a new trial ordered after the Court found the trial judge misapplied W.(D.) and used disbelief of the accused as a makeweight for guilt.
Although the judge found the complainant probably truthful and the accused not fully credible, a material inconsistency in the complainant's prior police statement about the mechanics of the touching ('put his hands down my pants') compared with her trial account, combined with plausible exculpatory testimony from the accused, produced a reasonable doubt; therefore the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused was acquitted.
Source excerpt
The trial judge properly considered the totality of undisputed and disputed evidence, applied the correct burden and standard of proof (reasonable doubt), gave adequate weight to both objective indicia and relevant subjective factors in characterizing the relationship, and did not make a material misapprehension or reverse the burden; accordingly the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant occupied a position of authority and the conviction for sexual exploitation stands.
Source excerpt
Explore more
