Law360 Canada ( October 10, 2025, 9:35 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from his convictions. The appellant was convicted of robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, assault causing bodily harm, and disguise with intent to commit an indictable offence. Mr. Darnell gave a statement to the police in which he indicated that one of the assailants looked familiar and reminded him of someone he had seen before. Mr. Darnell said that he was 90 per cent sure that this assailant was the appellant and he felt confident he could pick him out in a photo lineup. Detective Gordon examined the property that was brought in by the officers who arrested the appellant for impaired driving. He found a pair of white Louis Vuitton sunglasses which he seized as evidence in the robbery investigation. It was not disputed that the sunglasses seized by Detective Gordon were the same glasses that had been stolen from Mr. Darnell two days earlier. The key issue at trial was identity. Mr. Darnell recognized one of the attackers as the appellant because he had been a frequent guest at the hotel where Mr. Darnell worked for 12 years. The trial judge acknowledged some concerns with Mr. Darnell’s identification evidence but was ultimately satisfied that the appellant’s identity was established based on Mr. Darnell’s recognition of the appellant along with evidence independently corroborating that identification. The appellant argued that the trial judge misapprehended the corroborative evidence and because the misapprehensions were essential to the trial judge’s reasoning, a miscarriage of justice occurred, and he should either be acquitted or granted a new trial....