R. v. Pecoskie

R. v. Pecoskie

The conviction was upheld because Crown counsel's conduct did not amount to misconduct, the trial judge properly instructed the jury on post-offence conduct and appropriately addressed juror concerns, and no honest but mistaken belief in consent instruction was warranted by the evidence or counsel's agreement; the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
C33904
Parties
Respondent/appellant: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant/respondent: Philip Pecoskie
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Trial Counsel Conduct, Jury Instructions, Post Offence Conduct, Honest But Mistaken Belief in Consent, Juror Incapacity Inquiry, Sentencing, Conditional Sentence, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Sexual Assault Trial Counsel Conduct Jury Instructions Post Offence Conduct Honest But Mistaken Belief in Consent Juror Incapacity Inquiry Sentencing +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent/appellant

Philip Pecoskie

Appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Crown counsel engaged in misconduct warranting a new trial
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred by charging the jury on post-offence conduct
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge should have conducted an inquiry into a juror's notes about trial length

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was upheld because Crown counsel's conduct did not amount to misconduct, the trial judge properly instructed the jury on post-offence conduct and appropriately addressed juror concerns, and no honest but mistaken belief in consent instruction was warranted by the evidence or counsel's agreement; the conditional sentence was not disturbed on appeal despite Crown's request for custody because appellate intervention was unwarranted given the sentence's restrictive conditions and delay.

Court Disposition

Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Conviction appeal dismissed
  • Leave to appeal sentence granted