May 19th, 2017


R v Trainor, 2017 ABPC 90 per Semenuk, PCJ:

Law Updates Tags: , , ,

Impaired driving trial. After brief observations, the accused was asked by police to step out of his vehicle for further investigation. Issue regarding the admissibility of all indicia observed after the accused was directed to step from his vehicle (ie, while the right to counsel was suspended). Held: Acquitted. As per Visser, 2013 BCCA 393: … Read More.

February 17th, 2017


R v Wagar, 2017 ABPC 17 per LeGrandeur, PCJ

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Re-trial on sexual assault charge. Accused and complainant engaged in sexual activity in a bathroom during a party. Issue regarding consent. Held: Acquitted. Accused’s testimony raised a reasonable doubt. Complainant’s testimony not accepted. “Despite the fact that the absence of consent is purely subjective, it is open to the accused to claim that the complainant’s … Read More.

R v Barnes, 2017 ABCA 49 per Rowbotham, O’Ferrall, Greckol, JA – T. Judge: LeReverend, PCJ:

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Conviction appeal on charges including aggravated assault and robbery. 87 year old victim. Sole issue at trial was proof of identity. Complainant testified that he knew the accused, as the accused had been a tenant of his for several years. Complainant did express uncertainty about what year the assault occurred in. Held: Appeal dismissed. The … Read More.

December 7th, 2016


R v Paxton, 2016 ABCA 361 per McDonald, Bielby, Schutz, JA – T. Judge: Martin, J:

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Conviction appeal on charges including aggravated assault and sexual assault. Complainant was a young male who lived with the accused. Evidence was that the accused beat and confined the complainant over an extended period, and forced the complainant to engage in sexual acts. Held: Appeal dismissed. Lack of consent established. The complainant was manipulated into … Read More.

December 1st, 2016


R v Paxton, 2016 ABCA 361 per McDonald, Bielby, Schutz, JA – T. Judge: Martin, J:

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Conviction appeal on charges including aggravated assault and sexual assault. Complainant was a young male who lived with the accused. Evidence was that the accused beat and confined the complainant over an extended period, and forced the complainant to engage in sexual acts. Held: Appeal dismissed. Lack of consent established. The complainant was manipulated into … Read More.

September 29th, 2015


R. v. Holdershaw, 2015 ABPC 183 per Fraser, PCJ

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Trial on a charge of refusal to provide a screening breath sample. At trial, the officer did not have a copy of the wording of the demand read to the accused, and testified: “… so the demand just states that if he would accompany me to provide a sample of his breath.” Held: Acquittal entered. … Read More.

April 10th, 2015


R. v. Villaroman, 2015 ABCA 104 per Cote, O’Ferrall, Macleod, JA – T. Judge: Yamauchi, J

Law Updates Tags: , , ,

Appeal from conviction on charges of child pornography. Accused left his non password protected computer at a repair shop. Technician found some child pornography in a music-sharing folder. Issue regarding possession. Held: Appeal allowed, acquittal. The accused is entitled to rely upon an inference or hypothesis leading to an innocent explanation, based upon the lack … Read More.

March 17th, 2015


R. v. Rempel, 2015 ABCA 96 per Watson, McDonald, Brown, JA – T. Judge: Shelley, J.

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Appeal from dangerous driving causing death conviction. Speeding through a construction zone. Rear brakes of accused’s truck, trailer brakes, were not working well. Issue as to whether deficiencies in a vehicle’s condition which do not contribute to a collision are still appropriate considerations in assessing mens rea. Held: Appeal dismissed. “Hundal [1993] 1 SCR 867 … Read More.

January 9th, 2015


R. v. Chalifoux, 2014 ABPC 281 per Fradsham, PCJ

Law Updates Tags: , ,

Impaired driving trial. Issue as to whether breath technician proven to be a “qualified technician”. The “Qualified Technician Card” stated that the officer was “a person designated by the Province of Alberta, to perform evidential breath tests …”, as opposed to “a person designated by the Attorney General …” Held: Officer found to be a … Read More.