Law360 Canada ( November 13, 2026, 9:38 AM EST) -- Appeals by Hudson and Paramsothy (appellants) from their convictions for first-degree murder and application by Hudson for leave to appeal his sentences for offences arising from a condominium robbery. Hudson, a drug dealer supplied by Arcara, and Paramsothy met Arcara in a residential cul-de-sac. Before the meeting, Paramsothy modified his Glock 17 to accommodate an oil filter as a makeshift suppressor and purchased a suitable filter. Surveillance video showed Hudson approach Arcara’s Jeep before Paramsothy joined him. Arcara was fatally shot in the head and stabbed in the neck. The appellants later used Arcara’s keys to enter his condominium, where they confined his roommates at gunpoint while Hudson searched Arcara’s bedroom and Paramsothy guarded the roommates. The Crown maintained that the appellants jointly planned to murder Arcara to gain access to his condominium and steal drugs or money, and that Hudson was the shooter, although both were guilty regardless of who fired the shot. The trial judge accepted that theory, found that Hudson shot Arcara with Paramsothy’s modified Glock 17 and convicted Hudson as principal and Paramsothy as an aider. The appellants argued that the circumstantial evidence did not exclude a planned gun transaction or robbery during which one appellant spontaneously killed Arcara. Hudson further argued that the evidence did not exclude Paramsothy as the shooter. Hudson challenged the refusal to credit his presentence custody against his concurrent sentences for the condominium offences but acknowledged that the issue had no practical significance if his murder conviction stood....