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
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.
Although defence counsel's mitigation submission lacked evidentiary foundation and was improper, the prejudice was remediable by corrective jury instructions (including a directive to ignore the mitigation submission and a warning against speculation); the defendant retains the burden to prove failure to mitigate and extent of loss reduction, and absent evidence of specific alternate employment the jury should not speculate, so dismissal of the mistrial application was justified.
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding there was no Browne v. Dunn breach and that the corrective instruction was overbroad; a new trial was ordered.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant’s challenge to convictions for assault and sexual exploitation, finding no reversible error in the trial management or jury instructions.
Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a criminal appeal from convictions for assault with a weapon and sexual assault, finding no reversible error in the trial judge’s reasoning.
Personal injury judgment from a motor vehicle collision: liability was found against the defendant, but most causation and loss-of-earning claims failed.
Application for bail pending appeal dismissed because the asserted grounds of appeal (alleged improper use of prior consistent statements and alleged Browne v. Dunn error) were weak and did not clearly surpass the minimal 'not frivolous' threshold, and the enforceability/public confidence interest—given the serious child sexual offences—outweighed the reviewability interest; ineffective assistance claim was undeveloped and not prima facie established for bail purposes.
Source excerpt
The trial judge erred in applying Browne v. Dunn where no unfairness to the witness or the Crown resulted and in giving an instruction that allowed the jury to infer prejudice from defence counsel's failure to put matters to the witness; that error was prejudicial to the appellant given the centrality of the witness's evidence and required ordering a new trial on the convicted count.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal from a sexual assault conviction, finding material errors in the judge’s use of Browne v. Dunn and a misapprehension of evidence.
Explore more
