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
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.
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 Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside convictions for sexual offences, and ordered a new trial after finding an error in the collusion instruction.
The Cellebrite extractions were admissible and, when tested against extensive extrinsic corroborative evidence (device activity gaps and unlock timestamps, GPS coordinates resolving to the accused's residence, Facebook and banking data, seizure circumstances, photos matching residence), the court accepted the reports without expert opinion; on that basis identity, jurisdiction and temporal elements were proven and the Crown established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused possessed, accessed, transmitted/made available CSAEM and engaged in grooming/luring conduct, warranting convictions…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed a sexual assault appeal, holding the trial judge properly applied W.(D.), could assess consent by phase, and gave adequate reasons.
Viewing the circumstantial evidence as a whole, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge of and some measure of control over the drugs and firearm because alternative reasonable inferences existed (including that they had just arrived or that another occupant had control), items were not clearly in plain view or linked to the accused, and forensic or contextual evidence (tenancy, surveillance, keys, fingerprints, personal effects) was absent; therefore guilt was not the only reasonable inference and the accused must be acquitted.
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Michael Morris’s conviction appeal and sentence appeal, holding the jury charge on motive was adequate and the sentencing judge did not rely on lack of remorse.
The trial judge's instructions misdescribed the fact-finding process by directing jurors to treat disputed facts established on a balance of probabilities and by suggesting a discrete two-step deliberative process, creating a real risk the jury convicted on less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt; the conviction was set aside and a new trial ordered; the Crown's sealing request was dismissed as unnecessary given the publication ban and record access policy.
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a sexual assault conviction appeal, holding the trial judge’s credibility findings were not inconsistent and that text messages were used only for context.
The Court Martial Appeal Court allowed Master Corporal Houde’s appeal, finding fundamental errors in jury instructions and in comments on photographic evidence.
Explore more
