R. v. McLean
Because the trial judge expressly found that the complainant had lied and that the appellant had been in her apartment with her permission immediately before the incident, the essential elements of criminal harassment were not established and consequently the convictions for criminal harassment and for break and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C36176
- Parties
- Appellant: Courtney Hugh McLean; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 26 September 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; convictions for criminal harassment and break and enter with intent to commit criminal harassment quashed; remaining convictions and sentence upheld.
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Harassment, Break and Enter, Assault, Mischief, Breach of Probation, Appeal
- 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
Courtney Hugh McLean
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the elements of criminal harassment were established by the evidence
- 2 Whether the break and enter conviction with intent to commit criminal harassment was supported by the findings of fact
- 3 Impact of the trial judge's credibility findings on the essential elements of the offences
Ratio Decidendi
Because the trial judge expressly found that the complainant had lied and that the appellant had been in her apartment with her permission immediately before the incident, the essential elements of criminal harassment were not established and consequently the convictions for criminal harassment and for break and enter with intent to commit criminal harassment were quashed.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; convictions for criminal harassment and break and enter with intent to commit criminal harassment quashed; remaining convictions and sentence upheld.
Orders
- Convictions for criminal harassment and for break and enter with intent to commit criminal harassment are quashed.
- All other convictions (assault, mischief and breach of probation) and the imposed sentence are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. McLean Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2001-09-26 Docket numbers C36176 Judges Charron, Louise Vivianne; Sharpe, Robert J.; Simmons, Janet M. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20010926 DOCKET: C36176 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. COURTNEY HUGH McLEAN (Appellant) BEFORE: CHARRON, SHARPE and SIMMONS JJ.A. COUNSEL: Courtney Hugh McLean, the appellant, in person Leslie Paine, for the respondent HEARD: September 24, 2001 On appeal from his conviction by Justice Clair B. Marchand on March 19, 2001 and from the sentence imposed on April 3, 2001 ENDORSEMENT [1] It is our view that the offence of criminal harassment has not been made out based on the facts found by the trial judge. Crucial aspects of the appellant’s interaction with the complainant on the day in question (e.g. phone calls to her) cannot be viewed as criminal harassment in light of the trial judge’s express finding that the complainant had lied and that the appellant had been in her apartment with her permission immediately before the incident. Consequently, the convictions for criminal harassment and for break and enter with intent to commit criminal harassment cannot stand. The appeal is allowed, those two convictions are quashed. The remaining convictions and sentence (assault, mischief and breach of probation) remain. (signed) “Louise Charron J.A.” (signed) “Robert J. Sharpe J.A.” (signed) “Janet Simmons J.A.”