R. v. Lake
The Court held that the evidence could reasonably support the trial judge's findings and the convictions must stand; the sentence disclosed no error in principle and was within the acceptable range, therefore both the conviction and sentence appeals were dismissed (leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C38202, M28657, M29500
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Chad Lake
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 5 April 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Conviction Appeal, Sentence Appeal, Standard of Review, Range of Sentence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Chad Lake
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the convictions were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence
- 2 Whether the sentence involved an error in principle or was outside the permissible range
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the evidence could reasonably support the trial judge's findings and the convictions must stand; the sentence disclosed no error in principle and was within the acceptable range, therefore both the conviction and sentence appeals were dismissed (leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal dismissed).
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Conviction appeal dismissed.
- Leave to appeal sentence granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Lake Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2004-04-05 Docket numbers C38202, M28657, M29500 Judges Goudge, Stephen Thomas; MacPherson, James C.; Cronk, Eleanore Ann Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20040405 DOCKET: C38202 M28657 M29500 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) - and - CHAD LAKE (Appellant) BEFORE: GOUDGE, MacPHERSON AND CRONK JJ.A. COUNSEL: Howard J. Borenstein for the appellant Andrew Sabbadini for the Crown, respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: April 1, 2004 On appeal from the conviction by Justice Thomas Dunn of the Superior Court of Justice dated February 8, 2004 and from the sentence imposed by Justice Thomas Dunn dated April 15, 2002. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view it was entirely open to the trial judge to view the evidence as he did. We certainly cannot say that no reasonable trier of fact could have reached this conclusion. The convictions appeal is dismissed. [2] The sentence imposed reflects no error in principle nor is it outside the range. Leave to appeal sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed.