Law360 Canada ( April 10, 2025, 1:10 PM EDT) -- Appeal by Crown and cross-appeals by Pan, Mylvaganam, Wong and Crawford (collectively the “Respondents”) from judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal, which set aside convictions for first-degree murder and ordered a new trial, and affirmed convictions for attempted murder. Three armed men entered the home of Pan and her parents. Her parents were shot while Pan was left unharmed. Pan’s mother died from her injuries. Her father survived. The Crown’s theory was that Pan had arranged for her parents to be killed. The Respondents were charged with first-degree murder and attempted murder. They were convicted by a jury on both counts. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeals on the convictions for first-degree murder and ordered a new trial. It concluded that the trial judge erred by not leaving the included offences of second-degree murder and manslaughter with the jury and by withholding the option of considering each count separately. The appeals on the convictions for attempted murder were dismissed. The Crown sought to restore the convictions for first-degree murder. It argued that the Court of Appeal was wrong to conclude that the lesser included offences of second-degree murder and manslaughter should have been left with the jury for this count. It also argued that the curative proviso could apply to the error. The Respondents each cross-appealed. They sought to set aside their convictions for attempted murder and order a new trial on this count. They argued that the trial judge’s error in failing to leave the included offences with the jury tainted the attempted murder convictions in addition to the first-degree murder convictions. Therefore, a new trial was warranted on both counts. They also raised other grounds of appeal, which they said provided a basis for ordering a new trial on both counts....