Legal Battles - Canada vs Patrick Fox
Contact
Patrick Fox
Torrance, CA     90503
fox@patrickfox.org

Amended Notice of Appeal - Appeal of 244069-5-BC

This page is incomplete! Must add the commentary and synopsis.
Court file no. 30630-1
Vancouver Registry
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Between
REGINA
Respondent
v.
And
PATRICK HENRY FOX
Appellant
AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL
Defence Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Particulars of Conviction, Sentence or Other Order:

  1. 1.
    Place of conviction, sentencing or other order and court file number:
    Vancouver Provincial Court File 244069-5-BC
  2. 2.
    Name of judge:
    The Honourable Judge St. Pierre
  3. 3.
    Offence(s) of which the appellant was convicted:
    Two counts of failing to comply with a probation order
  4. 4.
    Section of the Criminal Code or other act under which defendant was convicted:
    Section 733.1
  5. 5.
    Plea at trial:
    Not guilty
  6. 6.
    Length of trial:
    Approximately 10 days
  7. 7.
    Sentence:
    12 months imprisonment and 18 months probation
  8. 8.
    Conviction date:
    6 March 2020
  9. 9.
    Sentencing date:
    12 June 2020
  10. 10.
    Place of incarceration:
    North Fraser Pretrial Centre

TAKE NOTICE that the appellant:

  1. (a) Appeals against conviction, and
  2. (b) Appeals against sentence

The grounds for appeal are:

The Provincial Court Judge erred in law by not considering whether the Crown had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had subjective mens rea for the breaches of probation, before proceeding to consider whether the accused had a reasonable excuse for breaches otherwise proven.

Additionally or in the alternative, the Provincial Court Judge erred by providing insufficient reasons for deciding that mens rea for the breaches of probation had been proven.

The verdict was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence, because:

  • The Court erred in disregarding Crown Counsel's prior afreement that they would not prosecute the appellant for these breaches if he were removed or told to leave Canada by Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) or the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA);
  • The Court erred in how it applied the immigration laws and CBSA's duties as they apply to a person who is physically present at a port of entry;
  • The Court erred by accepting CBSA Officer Polisak's testimony, because CBSA policies contradict her testimony;
  • The Court erred in finding that the appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for breaching his probation conditions.

Regarding sentence:

  1. (a) The probation condition should have been contingent on an official determination by IRCC that the appellant is legally authorized to be present in Canada; also
  2. (b) The probation period should have commenced immediately, so it's expiration coincides with the prior probation order as stated by the Court.

And such further grounds as the appellant or his counsel may advise, and this Honourable Court may permit.

The relief sought is: An order allowing the appeal and ordering a new trial.

The appellant's address for service is:

North Fraser Pre-Trial Centre
1451 Kingsway Avenue
Port Coquitlam, BC
V3C 1S2

Dated this 17th day of November, 2020
Signature of Marian K. Brown Marian K. Brown
Counsel Appointed for the Limited Purpose
Of Assisting the Appellant With a s. 684
Application for Appointment of Counsel

TO THE REGISTRAR