Law360 Canada ( January 5, 2026, 9:41 AM EST) -- Appeal by appellant from committal order for extradition to the United States (U.S.), application to admit fresh evidence, and judicial review of the Minister’s surrender decision. The appellant, a Canadian citizen, was sought by the U.S. for prosecution on charges relating to alleged child exploitation communications with two minors in Pennsylvania. He was arrested in Canada under the Extradition Act and charged domestically for offences involving one of the minors, but not the other. The Canadian charges were stayed shortly before trial. The appellant alleged that the Crown withdrew the charges to avoid a Jordan delay and sought a stay of extradition proceedings, claiming a breach of his Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter). The extradition judge dismissed the Charter application, finding no abuse of process. The appellant then consented to committal and appealed the committal order and the dismissal of his Charter application. He also sought to admit fresh evidence and challenged the Minister’s decision to surrender him unconditionally to the U.S. The appellant argued that his offer to plead guilty in Canada should have precluded extradition, that the Minister failed to properly consider the Cotroni factors, and that the Minister’s refusal to refer the matter to domestic prosecutors was unreasonable. The appellant said he was not appealing the interlocutory ruling on its own but rather appealing the committal order. He submitted the extradition judge’s decision to deny the stay formed part of the ultimate decision to issue the committal order. The respondent argued that because the appellant consented to the committal order, his only avenue of appeal was to demonstrate a miscarriage of justice....