In Tucker v. R., 2022 NBCA 59, October 13, 2022, the accused was convicted of a number of offences and sentenced to a period of imprisonment.  He appealed from sentence, arguing in part, that a reasonable apprehension of bias arose because the sentencing judge had earlier denied him judicial interim release.

The Appeal was dismissed.  The New Brunswick Court of Appeal concluded that a reasonable apprehension of bias had “not been made out” (at paragraph 21):

An allegation of reasonable apprehension of bias is not made out simply because the same judge who denied bail subsequently presides over that individual’s sentencing hearing. Judges are mandated to discharge their judicial duties with impartiality and integrity, and at all times to do justice according to law. A reasonable person, properly informed, would see no apprehension of bias in the present case. While I do not reject outright the notion that it is conceivable judicial comments made during the course of a bail hearing could potentially give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias should that same judge be presiding over the eventual sentencing hearing, it would be a rare occurrence. It certainly did not happen here.