... Skip to main content

Criminal Appeal Lawyers — Toronto, Milton, Oshawa, Newmarket & Brampton

How to Appeal Your Criminal Case in Ontario

Daniel Brown Law represents people appealing criminal convictions and sentences across Ontario. Our appellate lawyers challenge wrongful convictions at the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada, seek reduced sentences, and obtain bail pending appeal so clients avoid unnecessary jail time during the process.

Appeals run on strict timelines. If you plan to challenge a conviction or sentence—or respond to a Crown appeal—contact us immediately to protect your rights.

Our team of experienced appellate lawyers have handled hundreds of appeals across Ontario. We work to overturn convictions or reduce unfair sentences, and where appropriate, seek to pause related orders (driver's licence suspensions, fines, or probation) while the appeal proceeds.

Clients often secure bail pending appeal, avoiding unnecessary jail time during the process.

Awards & Recognition

Daniel Brown Law has a leading appellate practice, defending appeals at the Ontario Court of Appeal, Superior Court of Justice, and Supreme Court of Canada, including responses to Crown appeals. Daniel Brown is a certified specialist in criminal law — a designation held by fewer than 2% of criminal lawyers in Ontario — and contributes commentary on appellate decisions and criminal-law issues to The Toronto Star and other major Canadian news outlets.

The firm and its lawyers have been repeatedly recognized for excellence in criminal defence:

Our Experience

Nationally Recognized Appellate Team

Across Canada, our appellate team is a top choice for criminal appeals. Our team of experts in appeal law handle:

  • Summary conviction appeals at the Superior Court of Justice
  • Indictable appeals before the Court of Appeal for Ontario
  • Cases argued at the Supreme Court of Canada

Defence lawyers throughout Ontario regularly rely on Daniel Brown and our team when clients face wrongful convictions at trial.

Legal Commentary in the Media

Daniel Brown Law's team of appeal lawyers provides trusted legal insight in Canadian media, including high-profile appellate coverage:

No matter what appellate challenges you face, our lawyers help you seek a second chance in the justice system.

Act Quickly on Strict Timelines

The deadline to file a notice of appeal is often 30 days from sentencing. Arrange an appointment with our appeal team as soon as possible after a conviction or sentence.

Grounds for Appeal Explained

Common Reasons for Appealing

Appellate courts hear cases only where valid appeal grounds exist. Common examples of appeal grounds include:

  • The judge demonstrated bias towards the Crown or Defence
  • The defendant was provided negligent ("ineffective") assistance from counsel. This often requires the appellant to demonstrate that their counsel displayed a high level of incompetence that ultimately impacted on the outcome of the case.
  • The judge gave inadequate reasons for the verdict or sentence they imposed
  • A misapprehension of the evidence (mistake as to the substance of the evidence) that is central to why the judge's convicted the Appellant.
  • The prosecutor used inflammatory or misleading information in their closing or opening jury address or during their cross-examination.
  • Defence counsel acted in a conflict of interest that prevented them from properly representing their client.
  • The trial judge failed to explain the importance of the evidence to the jury on a material issue or misstated the evidence to the jury
  • The legal instructions the trial judge gave the jury was confusing
  • A guilty plea was either not given voluntarily, it was not informed or it was equivocal.
  • The trial judge improperly intervened in questioning of a witness or that the judge improperly curtailed cross-examination questions.
  • The trial Judge failed to properly assist a self-represented accused by ensuring they had the appropriate legal tools to defend themselves.
  • The Judge made errors in jury instructions that misled the jury about the correct verdict
  • Improper admission or exclusion of evidence affecting the verdict
  • Procedural irregularities that denied a fair trial
  • Misunderstandings about key pieces of evidence by the trial judge that led to an incorrect verdict
  • A judge's failure to apply the correct legal principles or evidentiary rules
  • Sentencing errors (unlawful or disproportionate punishments)

Identifying strong grounds early is crucial for a compelling appeal.

Routes of Appeal

In Ontario, determining where an appeal is argued is decided by the type of trial that took place, not where the original trial took place.

  • Indictable appeals: Argued before a panel of three or five judges at the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Toronto.
  • Summary conviction appeals: These appeals are litigated in the Superior Court of Justice before a single judge in the same jurisdiction as the original trial.
  • Provincial offences appeals: If the trial was presided over by a Justice of the Peace, provincial offence appeals are heard by a single judge in the Ontario Court of Justice. Provincial Offences Act appeals originally decided by a provincial court judge are argued before a single judge in the Superior Court of Justice in the jurisdiction where the original case took place.

You can read here for more information about Provincial Offences appeals.

Step-by-Step Criminal Appeal Process in Ontario

From Filing to Decision

Appeals in Ontario usually follow these steps:

  1. File the notice of appeal within the deadline
  2. Order and prepare trial transcripts
  3. Compile the appeal record and factum
  4. Exchange and file written submissions
  5. Schedule and attend the appeal hearing
  6. Receive the court's decision

Skilled counsel helps each stage move forward without costly mistakes or delays.

What Happens If You Don't Appeal?

Failing to appeal can permanently limit your legal options. Without timely action:

  • You may serve the full sentence, including jail and probation
  • Driver's licence suspensions, fines, and other penalties remain in effect
  • Future chances to challenge the conviction or sentence may disappear

Act quickly to preserve your rights.

Appealing Guilty Pleas

A guilty plea doesn't always end a case. You may appeal if:

  • The plea was uninformed or based on bad legal advice
  • The plea was involuntary or made under duress
  • The judge failed to ensure the plea met legal standards

Discuss these scenarios with appellate counsel to uncover options.

Bail Pending Appeal

For someone sentenced to jail following their trial, it is common to apply for bail while their appeal is pending a decision. Appeal bail hearings are decided by a single judge at the court where the appeal is being argued.

To obtain bail pending appeal, the Appellant must first demonstrate to the judge that their appeal is not frivolous or doomed to fail. The Appellant must also demonstrate that they will surrender back into custody before the appeal is decided. Lastly, the Appellant must prove that their release on bail is not contrary to the public interest. The judge will weigh any risk to public safety and consider public perceptions when determining whether the Appellant's release is in the public interest. The longer the jail sentence, the stronger the public interest factor pulls away from granting bail.

Bail Pending Appeal — Case Examples

We have helped numerous clients remain out of custody while awaiting their appeals, including:

  • Serious sexual assault allegations for our client who later had his case overturned.
  • A fraud conviction client who obtained bail and continued working to support family
  • An impaired driving client who avoided months of jail while the appeal proceeded

Bail pending appeal can protect livelihoods and family life while an appeal hearing takes place.

Ontario vs. Other Provinces

Appeal processes share similarities nationwide, but Ontario has unique aspects:

  • The Court of Appeal for Ontario hears all indictable appeals in Toronto, regardless of the original trial venue
  • Ontario maintains specific deadlines and procedures for filing factums and transcripts
  • Courts here may emphasize precedents that differ from those in other provinces

Ontario-based counsel ensures your case benefits from local expertise.

More FAQs About Appeal Outcomes

What If the Appeal Fails?

If an appeal does not succeed, the original conviction or sentence remains. In rare cases, further appeal to a higher court (including the Supreme Court of Canada) may be possible if a legal error is identified.

Can I Appeal Again?

Yes, but only with leave (permission) from a higher level appeal court or the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Court of Canada appeals usually involve questions of national importance or unsettled points of law.

Supreme Court of Canada Appeals

Leave to appeal is normally required to bring an appeal case to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada will consider whether the appeal raises both a "question of law" and is of "national importance" before they will agree to hear the appeal. Supreme Court of Canada appeals are often heard by a full panel of 9 judges. Statistically, less than 10% of all appeal requests to the Supreme Court will be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.

In some circumstances, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear an appeal without granting permission first. "As of right" appeals will be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada on any case that involves a question of law on which at least one judge of the court of appeal disagrees with the outcome of the majority opinion on the appeal. The Court will also hear an appeal automatically when the court of appeal allows a Crown appeal and substitutes a guilty verdict in place of the acquittal.

How Long Does an Appeal Take?

Many appeals take several months to a year, depending on scheduling and complexity. Appeals with fresh evidence or complex issues may take longer.

Appeals in Specialized Offences

Sexual Assault Appeals

Often focus on credibility assessments or misapplication of consent laws.

Domestic Violence Appeals

Courts frequently review trial errors related to evidence admission or witness testimony.

Impaired Driving Appeals

Many appeals challenge police procedure, breathalyzer evidence, or Charter rights.

Fraud Appeals

Complex financial evidence and sentencing disputes are common grounds.

Why Choose Daniel Brown Law for Appeals?

Criminal appeals demand a different skill set than trial work — they require identifying legal errors in the record, constructing written arguments that persuade appellate judges, and knowing when to press for bail pending appeal so a client doesn't serve time unnecessarily. Our firm has handled hundreds of appeals at every level, from the Superior Court of Justice to the Supreme Court of Canada. Best Lawyers recognizes our appellate practice specifically, alongside our broader criminal defence work — one of the few Canadian firms to receive that designation. When a conviction or sentence needs to be challenged, clients and defence counsel across Ontario turn to us because of our depth of experience and our record of results.

When freedom, reputation, and future opportunities are at stake, clients choose Daniel Brown Law to protect their rights and overturn unfair verdicts.

How Appeals Work

Review of the Original Trial

An appeal is not a new trial. The appeal court reviews the original proceedings, including transcripts, exhibits, and trial rulings. It rarely hears new witnesses or evidence and seldom reassesses credibility unless a legal error affected it.

What Is a Factum?

A factum is the written submission outlining the facts and legal arguments on appeal. Most appellate work occurs in writing before the hearing; both parties must file their factums in advance of the appeal hearing.

Can I Introduce New Evidence?

Fresh evidence is admitted only in limited situations where the original evidence was unavailable despite diligence, is credible and relevant, and could have influenced the verdict. See: Winning Your Appeal With Fresh Evidence.

Possible Outcomes of an Appeal

If You Win Your Appeal

A successful appeal can result in:

  • A new trial — the conviction is set aside and a new trial may be ordered (the Crown may decide not to re-prosecute). A new trial is the most common outcome of a successful criminal law appeal.
  • An acquittal — if the trial evidence was insufficient, the court may enter a verdict of not guilty.
  • A reduced sentence — the court may lower the sentence, change the outcome from a conviction to a discharge, or strike specific orders (e.g., fines, probation, DNA collection).

Sentence Appeals

Appeal court judges will often defer to the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge unless the sentencing judge commits legal mistakes or imposes a sentence that is far too high or low.

Fresh evidence is routinely introduced at the appeal hearing to demonstrate the Appellant's progress since they were first sentenced.

Sentence appeals are often difficult because appeal courts will strongly defer to the trial judge's decision on the appropriate length or type of sentence.

Costs of a Criminal Appeal

Factors That Influence Costs

Costs for litigating criminal appeals vary based on whether the appeal is summary or indictable, the complexity of legal issues, whether fresh evidence is introduced, and the length of the trial and pre-trial motions. Each case is specific so there is not one single price to bring an appeal.

Transcript Expenses

Transcripts are a major expense. Every word of the trial must be transcribed (e.g., $6.30 per page). A single trial day may cost about $1,000 in transcript fees, so a five-day trial could exceed $5,000.

  • Conviction appeals usually require the full transcript
  • Sentence appeals may proceed with a shorter record and agreed facts, reducing costs

Get Help With Your Criminal Appeal

Delays can jeopardize your case. Strict deadlines apply, so contact a criminal defence lawyer immediately if you need appellate help.

Past successes do not guarantee future results. Outcomes vary based on the facts and merits of each case.

Notable Appeals

Our lawyers overturn convictions, win acquittals, and shape the law at every level of court, up to and including the Supreme Court of Canada. The decisions below are a selection of our reported appellate work, organized by area; each links to the full ruling on CanLII. Most appeals are won by overturning a conviction and securing a new trial or a Charter remedy, with outright acquittals noted where they were entered.

Supreme Court of Canada

  • R. v. Jacques-Taylor, 2026 SCC 20 — Firearms prosecution; section 11(b) trial within a reasonable time. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Kinamore, 2025 SCC 19 — Evidence of a complainant’s sexual inactivity is “sexual history” under s. 276 and presumptively inadmissible. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Abdullahi, 2023 SCC 19 — Jury instructions on the structure-and-continuity element of a criminal organization; conviction on that count set aside. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Ndhlovu, 2022 SCC 38 — Mandatory and lifetime sex-offender registration (SOIRA) struck down as overbroad under s. 7. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Kirkpatrick, 2022 SCC 33 — Condom use and the scope of consent to “the sexual activity in question” under s. 273.1. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. J.J., 2022 SCC 28 — Constitutionality of the private-records screening regime for sexual-offence trials (ss. 278.92 to 278.94). Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. K.G.K., 2020 SCC 18 — Section 11(b); whether the time a judge takes to deliver a verdict counts toward the trial-within-a-reasonable-time ceiling. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Goldfinch, 2019 SCC 38 — Section 276 admissibility of a complainant’s prior sexual history and the twin myths; new trial ordered. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Le, 2019 SCC 34 — Section 9 arbitrary detention and racial profiling; evidence excluded and acquittals entered. Intervener, Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers and the Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic.
  • R. v. Morrison, 2019 SCC 15 — Landmark child-luring ruling; the s. 172.1(3) presumption of belief in age struck down as unconstitutional. Counsel for the accused.
  • Orphan Well Association v. Grant Thornton Ltd., 2019 SCC 5 — Bankruptcy and insolvency; environmental abandonment and reclamation obligations survive bankruptcy (the Redwater decision). Intervener, Greenpeace Canada.
  • R. v. Bingley, 2017 SCC 12 — Admissibility of Drug Recognition Expert evidence in the impaired-driving regime. Intervener, Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
  • R. v. Godin, 2009 SCC 26 — Leading authority on the right to be tried within a reasonable time (s. 11(b)); delay found unreasonable and the stay of proceedings restored. Counsel for the accused.

Sexual Offences

  • R. v. Gandhi, 2026 ONCA 407 — Sexual assault; Crown appeal dismissed and the acquittal upheld where an in-dock identification by video years later was too weak to support a conviction.
  • R. v. Toole, 2026 ONCA 99 — Sexual assault; Crown appeal from a s. 11(b) Jordan stay dismissed and the stay upheld.
  • R. v. Barkouk, 2025 ONSC 4107 — Conviction overturned for a material misapprehension of the evidence.
  • R. v. I.M.B., 2025 ONCA 678 — Improper restriction of cross-examination; convictions quashed, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. D.L., 2025 ONCA 533 — Sexual assault; conviction appeal allowed in part — 5 of 16 counts stayed; Crown appeals against four acquittals and a conditional sentence dismissed.
  • R. v. D.K.S., 2024 ONSC 1865 — Conviction quashed and new trial ordered.
  • R. v. R.B.-C., 2024 ONCA 930 — Post-conviction sentencing delay breached s. 11(b); sentence reduced as a Charter remedy.
  • R. v. B.B., 2024 ONCA 788 — Misapplied Browne v. Dunn rule in the jury charge; conviction quashed, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Vallotton, 2024 ONCA 492 — Jordan delay exceeded the ceiling; stay of proceedings entered.
  • R. v. A.B., 2024 ONCA 446 — Jury wrongly permitted to convict on a negligence standard; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Clyde, 2024 ONCA 113 — Historical child sexual-offence convictions set aside; new trial ordered.
  • R. v. U.K., 2023 ONCA 587 — Misdirection on fabricated statements as evidence of guilt; convictions set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Sousa, 2023 ONCA 100 — Sentence found unfit and reduced from 10 to 8 years.
  • R. v. S.G., 2022 ONCA 727 — Misapprehension of the complainant’s evidence; convictions set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Murphy, 2022 ONCA 615 — Aggravated sexual assault (HIV non-disclosure); fresh expert evidence of an undetectable viral load led to an acquittal.
  • R. v. N.P., 2022 ONCA 597 — Failure to consider whether the complainant’s evidence raised a reasonable doubt; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. S.T., 2022 ONCA 443 — Released on bail pending the conviction appeal, including recognition of an out-of-province surety.
  • R. v. J.M., 2021 ONCA 150 — Improper reliance on personal experience and outside material; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Z.W.C., 2021 ONCA 116 — Improper admission of prior discreditable-conduct evidence; new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Phelps, 2020 ONSC 5228 — Trial judge relied on stereotypes rather than evidence; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Smith, 2020 ONCA 782 — Error in the W.(D.) credibility analysis; new trial ordered.
  • R. v. M.S., 2019 ONCA 869 — Sexual-interference conviction set aside; new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Cepic, 2019 ONCA 541 — Sexual assault; a leading decision on impermissible stereotypical reasoning in credibility findings; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. Ururyar, 2017 ONSC 4428 — Conviction set aside where the trial judge reasoned from academic literature rather than the evidence; the Crown did not retry.
  • R. v. Sahdev, 2017 ONCA 900 — No reasons for refusing to sever counts; convictions set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. R.C., 2017 ONCA 806 — Granted bail pending appeal following an eight-year sentence.
  • R. v. P.G., 2017 ONCA 351 — Reasonable apprehension of bias from the trial judge’s conduct; conviction set aside, new trial ordered.
  • R. v. M.C., 2014 ONCA 307 — Conviction set aside; new trial ordered.
  • R. v. J.T., 2013 ONCA 486 — Crown sentence appeal dismissed; the favourable sentence upheld.
  • R. v. Gandhi (Superior Court of Justice, Brampton) — Sexual assault; conviction appeal allowed.
  • R. v. Lombardo (Superior Court of Justice, Toronto) — Sexual assault; conviction appeal allowed.
  • R. v. Mehra (Superior Court of Justice, Milton) — Sexual assault; conviction appeal allowed on consent.

Child Exploitation — Luring & Child Pornography

Drug Offences

Homicide

Firearms & Weapons

  • R. v. Ahmed, 2022 ONCA 640 — Firearms convictions overturned on a misapprehension of evidence; co-accused acquitted and the client granted a new trial.
  • R. v. Ahmed, 2020 ONCA 572 — Firearms; bail pending appeal granted.
  • R. v. Wong, 2015 ONCA 657 — Right to counsel breached; drug and firearm evidence excluded and acquittals on all counts.
  • R. v. Smickle, 2013 ONCA 678 — Landmark ruling striking the three-year mandatory minimum for a loaded prohibited firearm (s. 95); on re-sentencing, no further custody imposed.

Robbery, Assault & Violent Crime

Impaired & Dangerous Driving

Charter, Evidence & Procedure

Sentence Appeals

Contact Daniel Brown Law

Speak with an experienced criminal appeal lawyer today. Call (416) 297-7200.

Best Law Firms Criminal Law
Best Lawyers Daniel Brown Law 2025
Top Criminal Boutique 2027 Daniel Brown Law LLP
Email us WhatsApp Call (416) 297-7200