Convicted killer loses appeal in murder of Kalix Langenau

Kalix Langenau was killed on Feb. 15, 2020, as the result of a dispute between him and Hunter Van Mackelberg. Van Mackelberg was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 12 years on May 26, 2022. (Supplied)

The Alberta Court of Appeal has denied an application to set aside the murder conviction of Hunter Van Mackelberg, who shot and killed Kalix Langenau more than five years ago.

Langenau’s remains were found in a rural area outside Airdrie on Feb. 17, 2020.

Van Mackelberg was sentenced to life in jail in May 2022 for second-degree murder in the case, with the judge at the time calling Langenau’s killing “an execution-style murder.”

At an appeal hearing on Sept. 13, 2024, Van Mackelberg told the court the trial was “a miscarriage of justice” and blamed his lawyer for providing “ineffective assistance.”

• Sign up for breaking news alerts from CTV News, right at your fingertips
• The information you need to know, sent directly to you: Download the CTV News App

The appellant’s lawyer said certain evidence provided by certain witnesses was inadmissible, saying it was based on “hearsay.”

The appeal court disagreed with the claim, saying evidence of what witnesses had been told by others is permissible in several ways.

“The admissibility of such statements is still dependent on relevance,” the court said. “The trial judge permitted the admission of some evidence on that basis.”

As for ineffective counsel leading to a miscarriage of justice, the appeal court said there is clear test to establish that ground, but it is not enough to merely illustrate a risk.

“The appellant bears the burden of establishing the factual foundation for the claim of ineffective assistance elements on a balance of probabilities,” the court said.

The appeal court rejected Van Mackelberg’s arguments about his counsel acting without instructions, the handling of cross-examinations of key witnesses as well as assertions about the agreed statement of facts, disclosure review or the decision to call evidence.

The court also denied the claim that Van Mackelberg’s lawyer briefly closing his eyes during a video statement suggested he was incapable of doing his job.

“It was admitted on appeal that he briefly closed his eyes during the replay of the video statement. That caused the trial judge to stop, and to ask the Crown to check if trial counsel was okay,” the court said.

“The appellant asserts that trial counsel fell asleep. Trial counsel adamantly denied that he did so.”

The court said this period of “momentary inattention” was not enough to undermine public confidence in the trial and thus dismissed Van Mackelberg’s appeal.