R. v. Meade.
The appellant failed to establish that his guilty plea was involuntary, coerced or uninformed given his own admissions and the record; accordingly the application to set aside the plea and the appeal from conviction are dismissed; leave to appeal sentence was granted but the sentence appeal was dismissed because...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C41576
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Gerard Meade
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 18 March 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence; Application to Set Aside Guilty Plea and Alternative Leave to Appeal Sentence
- Outcome
- Application to set aside guilty plea and appeal from conviction dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed; custodial portion moot.
- Legal Topics
- Guilty Plea Voluntariness, Coerced Plea, Withdrawal of Plea, Leave to Appeal Sentence, Mootness
- 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
Gerard Meade
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence; Application to Set Aside Guilty Plea and Alternative Leave to Appeal Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the guilty plea was voluntary, unequivocal and informed
- 2 Whether the appellant was coerced or misled by counsel into pleading guilty
- 3 Whether the sentencing judge erred in principle or imposed an unfit sentence
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to establish that his guilty plea was involuntary, coerced or uninformed given his own admissions and the record; accordingly the application to set aside the plea and the appeal from conviction are dismissed; leave to appeal sentence was granted but the sentence appeal was dismissed because there was no error in principle and the custodial portion was moot.
Court Disposition
Application to set aside guilty plea and appeal from conviction dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed; custodial portion moot.
Orders
- Application to set aside guilty plea dismissed
- Appeal from conviction dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Meade. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-03-18 Docket numbers C41576 Judges Sharpe, Robert J.; Simmons, Janet M.; LaForme, Harry Smith Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20050318 DOCKET: C41576 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – GERARD MEADE (Appellant) BEFORE: SHARPE, SIMMONS AND LAFORME JJ.A. COUNSEL: Scott Reid for the appellant Amy Alyea for the Crown respondent HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY: March 15, 2005 On appeal from the conviction by Justice H. Keenan of the Superior Court of Justice dated August 25, 2003 and from the sentence imposed by Justice H. Keenan dated August 25, 2003. ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant pleaded guilty to uttering a death threat and was sentenced to one day in prison and two years probation in addition to seven months and 22 days pre-trial custody. The appellant now seeks to withdraw his guilty plea and to appeal his conviction on the basis that he was pressured and directed by his counsel to plead guilty and was misled by her as to the consequences of his guilty plea. In the alternative, the appellant seeks leave to appeal the sentence imposed. [2] We would not give effect to the appellant’s appeal against conviction. In cross-examination the appellant acknowledged that he agreed to plead guilty based on his belief that he would be sentenced to one further day of imprisonment and be released by immigration authorities within 48 hours and that he would have been content had that been the outcome. In our view, this evidence undermines the appellant’s specific assertion that his plea was coerced, as well as his overall credibility. Moreover, particularly in the context of the appellant’s evidence concerning the prior plea negotiations, the appellant’s assertion that on the day he pleaded guilty he did not understand that he was charged with a criminal offence or that pleading guilty would result in a criminal conviction is simply incredible. [3] To be valid a guilty plea must be voluntary, unequivocal and informed. On the record before us the appellant has not established that his plea was invalid. The appellant’s application to set aside his guilty plea and his appeal from conviction are therefore dismissed. [4] The appellant’s appeal from the custodial portion of his sentence is moot. Further, given that the sentencing judge was presented with a joint submission, we are not satisfied that the sentencing judge made any error in principle or that the sentence was unfit. Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted, but the sentence appeal is dismissed. “Robert J. Sharpe J.A.” “Janet Simmons J.A.” “H. S. LaForme J.A.”