Delmar Doucette has a keen interest in conducting appeals to correct wrongful convictions. He has appeared for the defence on a steady basis in both the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the Supreme Court of Canada since his call to the bar in 1988. Mr. Doucette also has a full range of trial experience, in both jury and non–jury matters.
During 1993-1997, Mr. Doucette acted as associate commission counsel at the Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in Canada. During this nation–wide inquiry, he assisted the Honourable Mr. Justice Horace Krever, Commissioner, of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, to find the causes of the contamination of the Canadian blood supply during the 1980s.
Mr. Doucette is a co–author of Ruby on Sentencing and enjoys appearing on education panels to assist practitioners in their continuing legal education. He also acts on a regular basis as Duty Counsel to the Court of Appeal and on many occasions has been appointed by the Court to represent otherwise unrepresented appellants.
The following is a list of some significant reported judgments in cases that Mr. Doucette has litigated:
Recently Litigated Homicide Appeals:
- R. v. Mallory and Stewart (2007), 217 C.C.C. (3d) 266 (Ont.C.A.)
- R. v. Peltier,  O.J. No.1383 (Ont.C.A.)
- R. v. Almarales (2008), 237 C.C.C. (3d) 148 (Ont.C.A.)
- R. v. Candir (2009), 250 C.C.C. (3d) 139 (Ont.C.A.)
- R. v. Johnson (2010), 262 C.C.C. (3d) 404 (Ont.C.A.)
- R. v. Hall (2010), 263 C.C.C. (3d) 5 (Ont.C.A.)
Selected Appearances in the Supreme Court of Canada:
- R. v. Parks (1992), 75 C.C.C. (3d) 287 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. Alkerton (1993), 78 C.C.C. (3d) 576 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. Rowbotham (1994), 90 C.C.C. (3d) 449 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. Kelly (2001), 153 C.C.C. (3d) 45 (S.C.C.)
- Tulikorpi v. A.‐G. Ontario (2004), 182 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. White; Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. v. Canada (2010), 255 C.C.C. (3d) 473 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. Conway (2010), 255 C.C.C. (3d) 506 (S.C.C.)
- R. v. Ahmad (2011), 264 C.C.C. (3d) 345 (S.C.C.)
Major Trial Matters in which All Evidence Was Excluded or a Stay of Proceedings Was Obtained:
- R. v. Paryniuk,  O.J. No.36 (S.C.J.) ‐ stay of proceedings obtained in a case where $2M in illegal drugs and alleged drug money had been seized
- R. v. Kporwodu and Veno (2003), 176 C.C.C. (3d) 97 (S.C.J.) ‐ stay of proceedings obtained in a case alleging first degree murder
- R. v. Bogiatzis et al. ,  O.J. No.3335 (S.C.J.) ‐ all wiretap evidence excluded and an acquittal obtained in a case alleging a major drug conspiracy