R. v. Vong
Because the conviction was for a summary conviction offence under s. 286.1(1)(b), the Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal and the appeal was quashed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2020 ONCA 745
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Cun Chau Vong
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 November 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Crown Motion to Quash Appeal; Appeal Quashed by Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal quashed.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Jurisdiction, Summary Conviction Vs. Indictable, Interpretation of S. 286.1(1)(b)
- 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
Cun Chau Vong
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Crown Motion to Quash Appeal; Appeal Quashed by Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the offence charged under s. 286.1(1)(b)(i)(A) is punishable by summary conviction and whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal
- 2 Whether amendment of the Information and issues surrounding the plea affect appellate jurisdiction
Ratio Decidendi
Because the conviction was for a summary conviction offence under s. 286.1(1)(b), the Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal and the appeal was quashed.
Court Disposition
Appeal quashed.
Orders
- Appeal quashed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Vong Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2020-11-20 Neutral citation 2020 ONCA 745 Docket numbers C68010, M51799 Judges Simmons, Janet M.; Lauwers, Peter D.; Nordheimer, Ian V.B. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Vong, 2020 ONCA 745 DATE: 20201120 DOCKET: M51799 (C68010) Simmons, Lauwers and Nordheimer JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Cun Chau Vong Appellant Nadia Guo, for the appellant/responding party Nicolas de Montigny, for the respondent/moving party Heard and released orally: November 18, 2020 by video conference On appeal from the conviction entered on November 21, 2019 by Justice Peter C. West of the Ontario Court of Justice. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The Crown moves to quash this appeal on the ground that the charge in issue is a summary conviction offence and, consequently, any appeal from conviction lies to the Superior Court of Justice and not to this court. [2] We agree. The trial judge expressly referred to the section to which the appellant was pleading guilty, namely, s. 286.1(1)(b)(i)(A). He also amended the Information to record that specific offence. Section 286.1(1)(b) specifically creates offences that are punishable on summary conviction, with different fines applicable depending on the nature of the offence. While there may be other issues surrounding the plea in this case, they are all matters that are properly addressed at the appeal. Those issues do not change the fact that this was a conviction arising out of a summary conviction offence and, thus, an appeal does not lie to this court. [3] The appeal is quashed. “Janet Simmons J.A.” “P. Lauwers J.A.” “I.B.V. Nordheimer J.A.”