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 an appeal from sexual offence convictions, holding the trial judge’s reasons were sufficient and the mother’s evidence was largely hearsay.
Motion granted for release pending appeal in a criminal case. The court held the proposed appeal raised a non-frivolous credibility issue and detention was not necessary in the public interest.
Ontario Court of Appeal granted bail pending appeal in a sexual offence case, finding the appeal reviewable enough that detention was not necessary in the public interest.
The trial judge's findings on corroboration, credibility (including lack of embellishment and level of detail), and assessment of expert evidence on age-related attenuation were reasonable and supported by the record; there was no legal error in rejecting the applicability of burnout theory to this specific offender or in concluding a LTSO could not manage his risk, therefore the conviction and indeterminate sentence are upheld.
Source excerpt
The Court upheld the consecutive sentence because sexual exploitation targeted a different societal interest and related largely to a later period, and affirmed the global 10-year sentence as fit and proportionate given the unusually severe, prolonged breach of trust, significant impact on victims, absence of mitigation, prior relevant convictions and the sentencing judge's correct application of Friesen and sentencing principles, with appellate deference owed to the sentencing judge.
Source excerpt
The admission of the shower incident was proper because it was relevant to motive and to rebut fabrication and explain the complainant's conduct; no limiting instruction was required where the evidence was admitted for motive and defence counsel did not object but used the material tactically; the prior consistent statement was not led for its truth so a corroboration instruction was unnecessary; and the trial judge's direction to consider each count separately sufficed to prevent cross-count reasoning — therefore no miscarriage of justice occurred and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial because the trial judge improperly relied on the appellant's MTO driving record to impugn credibility and misapprehended material testimony about the 'Naked News' program; those cumulative errors undermined the central credibility findings and caused a miscarriage of justice that could not reliably be cured by the curative proviso.
Source excerpt
The sentencing judge did not err in law by giving limited weight to parts of the forensic psychiatrist's report without a prior warning to counsel; appellate deference applies to assessment of expert evidence and the 12 year sentence imposed was not demonstrably unfit given the aggravating facts, so the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court found no basis to overturn the trial judge's credibility findings or to conclude uneven scrutiny, unfair trial, or ineffective representation; the nine-year sentence was within principled range given repeated sexual violence against the appellant's minor child; however, on constitutional grounds and with Crown consent the lifetime SOIRA registration was reduced to 20 years.
Source excerpt
The conviction appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate error in the convictions or proceedings; the sentence appeal was allowed only to reduce the lifetime SOIRA order to 20 years (by Crown consent) and to impose conditional stays on three sexual assault counts while leaving the global 30‑month custodial sentence and other aspects of the sentence intact.
Source excerpt
Explore more
