R. v. Delong
The appeal was dismissed because there was an evidentiary basis for the trial judge’s credibility finding that the appellant choked the dog, and appellate deference precluded overturning that factual conclusion.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2008 ONCA 525
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Grayson Delong
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 30 June 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Animal Cruelty, Self Defence, Evidence Assessment, Conviction and 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
Grayson Delong
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was justified in using force against the dog (self‑defence)
- 2 Whether the appellant caused unnecessary suffering to the dog
- 3 Whether the trial judge's factual findings were supported by the evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because there was an evidentiary basis for the trial judge’s credibility finding that the appellant choked the dog, and appellate deference precluded overturning that factual conclusion.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Delong Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2008-06-30 Neutral citation 2008 ONCA 525 Docket numbers C46614 Judges Rosenberg, Marc; Simmons, Janet M.; Speyer, Christopher M. Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Delong, 2008 ONCA 525 DATE: 20080627 DOCKET: C46614 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO ROSENBERG, SIMMONS JJ.A. and SPEYER J. (ad hoc) BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent and GRAYSON DELONG Appellant Leslie Maunder for the appellant Joan Barrett for the respondent Heard and endorsed: June 26, 2008 On appeal from conviction and sentence by Justice Bruce J. Young of the Ontario Court of Justice dated September 29, 2006 APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The trial judge rejected the appellant’s version of events and in particular rejected the position of the defence that the appellant was merely defending himself from what he claimed was unnecessary force. The only question then was whether the appellant caused unnecessary suffering to the dog. In our view, there was an evidentiary basis for the trial judge’s finding in that the appellant choked the dog. [2] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.