Posted Monday, September 26, 2016:
R. v. Legebokoff,
2016 BCCA 386
Court of Appeal
Appeal from conviction on four counts of first degree murder. After the trial concluded, the trial judge expressed criticisms concerning the manner in which defence counsel had conducted a pre-trial change-of-venue application. L. submitted that this amounted to a miscarriage of justice. L.’s position was that the judge had a duty to immediately disclose his views and that the delay in doing so created an appearance of unfairness. L. did not allege any errors with respect to the conduct of the trial and conceded the evidence against him was overwhelming. In opposing the appeal, the Crown submitted that the judge’s criticisms were unfounded. Held: Appeal dismissed. The judge was not under a duty to immediately disclose his views, which in this case were unfounded. In the circumstances, a well-informed reasonable person’s confidence in the administration of justice would not be shaken by the delayed disclosure.
Posted Thursday, September 22, 2016:
R. v. Nguyen,
2016 BCCA 381
Court of Appeal
On an appeal from a sentence of 21 months’ incarceration and one year probation upon convictions arising out of an arson fire in commercial premises. Held: Appeal dismissed. Fresh evidence of the birth and need for care of the appellant’s daughter since the initial sentencing was admitted and considered. This evidence did not render the sentence demonstrably unfit. Minor amendments were made to the credit given for time served in pre-trial custody and to the quantum of one part of the restitution order.