Pubdate: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 Source: Winnipeg Free Press (CN MB) Copyright: 2016 Winnipeg Free Press Contact: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/send_a_letter Website: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/502 Author: Mike McIntyre Page: B2 TOO LATE TO TRY TO WIPE CONVICTION: COURT He wanted to turn back time and find a way to undo the sins of his past. But the Manitoba Court of Appeal has rejected a former Winnipeg man's bid to reopen his drug conviction - saying almost two decades is too long to have waited to make a move. Curtis Fraser pleaded guilty in March 1991 to possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. He received a federal penitentiary sentence, then moved to the United States following his release. Fraser applied for a pardon in 1999 and was successful. He now claims to have been made to mistakenly believe a pardon was the same thing as an appeal. Fraser insists he was innocent of the crime but simply pleaded guilty because of pressure from his co-accused brother and bad legal advice. However, Fraser waited until 2010 to file a notice of appeal, outlining these grounds. He said it wasn't until he was applying for permanent residency status in the U.S. that he realized the conviction hadn't been wiped away. However, no date for a hearing was set, and it was considered "abandoned" months later. Fraser took no further action until last fall, when he asked the Court of Appeal to finally hear his arguments. His application was denied in a written decision released this week. "The unusual aspect of this motion is the length of time that passed between the conviction and the original motion (in 2010), as well as since the abandonment of the original motion," Justice Jennifer Pfuetzner wrote. Pfuetzner said she is "very sympathetic" to Fraser's position given his lack of legal training, but there is no reasonable explanation for such a delay. As well, she said, the chances of a successful appeal are slim. "A total of 19 years elapsed from the time of conviction before the applicant raised his claim of factual innocence. Any transcripts of his plea and sentencing have been destroyed. In the circumstances, it is difficult to see that there is arguable merit to the proposed ground of appeal," the judge said. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom