January 28th, 2019
R. v Quintero-Gelvez, 2019 Alberta Court Of Appeal – Trial fairness prejudiced by Judge’s constant intervention of cross-examination.
Defence appeal from conviction at trial of sexual assault. Issue on appeal of whether the trial judge’s numerous interjections during cross-examination of the complainant impeded the accused’s right to make full answer and defence. Held: Appeal allowed; new trial. Schmaltz, 2015 ABCA 4 followed. “A review of the transcript of the cross-examination of the complainant … Read More.
R. v Kulasingam, 2019 Alberta Court Of Appeal – Adjournment denied for s. 276 application does not affect fairness to trial conviction.
Defence appeal from dismissal of summary conviction appeal. Accused was convicted of sexual assault and unlawful confinement. Issue on appeal of whether “the trial judge’s refusal to grant an adjournment to allow the appellant’s trial counsel to correct his procedural error [failure to bring a s. 276 application] resulted in an unfair trial”, or the … Read More.
R. v McCargar, 2019 Alberta Court Of Appeal – Prison knife kept for protection dangerous, not just defensive. Conviction upheld.
Appeal from conviction for possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace. Appellant was a serving prisoner found in possession of a plastic knife with razor blades. At trial, the appellant testified that he kept it for his own protection. Issue on appeal as to whether the trial judge erred in … Read More.
November 15th, 2018
R. v. Cuthill, 2018 Alberta Court Of Appeal – Self-Interested Letter From Co-Accused Not Admissible For It’s Truth
Three co-accused appealed first-degree murder convictions. Issue on Tim Rempel’s appeal was whether the trial judge should have admitted a letter authored by the co-accused as an exception to the hearsay rule. Held: Appeal dismissed. Letter did not fall under traditional exception: “[t]he thrust of the letter is not an admission against penal interest, but … Read More.
R v Gardiner, 2018 Alberta Court of Appeal – Conviction Overturned As Complainant Testified She “Consented” To A Fight Which Included Choking
Defence appeal from assault conviction. Domestic context. At trial, complainant testified the fight was consensual but she did not want to be choked. Held: Appeal allowed. “The proper question was not whether the complainant consented to each and every application of force during the course of the fight, or whether she ‘wanted’ to be choked … Read More.
September 14th, 2018
R v Schultenkamper, 2018 Edmonton Queen’s Bench – Appeal Rejects Argument That Trial Judge Failed To Consider Excupatory Impaired Evidence
Summary conviction appeal from impaired driving conviction. Defence argued on appeal that the trial judge failed to appreciate exculpatory evidence regarding whether the Appellant’s ability to drive was impaired by alcohol. The trial judge’s reasons did not mention certain “evidence of non-impairment” such as a lack of slurred speech, fine motor difficulty, disordered thinking, and … Read More.
June 8th, 2018
R v Chomiak, 2018 Alberta Court Of Appeal – 1st Degree Murder Upheld, Totality Of Circumstances Establishes Planning Intent
Appellant was convicted after trial of one count of first degree murder (of Ms. Chomiak, his estranged wife) and one count of second degree murder (of Ms. Bouchard), both by multiple gunshot wounds. Issue of whether trial judge erred in finding planning and deliberation to establish the first-degree murder offence. Trial judge relied on circumstantial … Read More.
June 1st, 2018
Crown appeal and application for reconsideration of Gladue, 2012 ABCA 143. Crown wished to challenge ratio that before police provide an opportunity to commit an offence, there must be pre-existing reasonable suspicion that the person is involved in the criminal activity to some degree. Crown argued that the standard could be met during the course … Read More.
November 14th, 2016
Appeal of conviction on one count of possession for the purpose of trafficking in cocaine. There was a 3-year delay in getting to trial, with none of the delay being the fault of the accused. The delay was the result of delays in getting disclosure, the Crown’s decision to prosecute multiple individuals on the same … Read More.
October 28th, 2015
Client plead guilty to two breaches and failing to turn himself into the Remand Centre. Crown and Defence Counsel submitted that a sentence of between 30 to 60 days was appropriate. Sentencing Judge imposed 111 days without giving either Counsel an opportunity to speak to an increase in sentence. Appointed to appeal the increase in … Read More.