R. v. Killeen
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant sought to relitigate grounds already decided at trial and on summary conviction appeal, at least one issue depended on trial findings of fact and did not raise a pure question of law, and the applicant failed to meet the R. v. R.(R.) standard; additionally, an s.839...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2015 ONCA 706
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Jason Killeen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 22 October 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Leave to Appeal Application / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal (refused)
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Summary Conviction Appeal, S. 839 Criminal Code, Question of Law Vs Findings of Fact, R. V. R.(r.) Standard
- 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
Jason Killeen
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Leave to Appeal Application / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal (refused)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted
- 2 Whether the grounds advanced were already litigated at trial and on summary conviction appeal
- 3 Whether at least one issue is inextricably intertwined with trial findings of fact and therefore not a pure question of law
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant sought to relitigate grounds already decided at trial and on summary conviction appeal, at least one issue depended on trial findings of fact and did not raise a pure question of law, and the applicant failed to meet the R. v. R.(R.) standard; additionally, an s.839 appeal is an appeal from the summary conviction appeal court, not a second appeal from trial.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused.
Orders
- Leave to appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Killeen Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2015-10-22 Neutral citation 2015 ONCA 706 Docket numbers C59633 Judges Watt, David; Hourigan, C. William; Huscroft, Grant Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Killeen, 2015 ONCA 706 DATE: 20151021 DOCKET: C59633 Watt, Hourigan and Huscroft JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Jason Killeen Appellant Patrick J. Leckey, for the appellant James V. Palangio, for the respondent Heard: October 19, 2015 On appeal from the decision of Justice J. Robert MacKinnon of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting as a summary conviction appeal court on October 23, 2014, dismissing an appeal from the conviction entered on April 24, 2014 by Justice Michael Harpur of the Ontario Court of Justice. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We are not satisfied that this is a case in which leave to appeal should be granted. [2] The applicant seeks to advance here grounds twice litigated, at trial and on summary conviction appeal. [3] The applicant relies on well-settled legal principles. At least one of the issues is inextricably intertwined with findings of fact made at trial and thus may not raise a question of law alone. [4] Further, the applicant seems to regard an appeal under s. 839 as a second appeal from the judgment at trial. It is not. It is, rather, an appeal from the decision of the summary conviction appeal court. [5] We are not persuaded that either ground meets the standard for granting leave under R. v. R.(R.). [6] Leave to appeal is refused.