R. v. Ibrahim
Because the appellant never sought to establish a legitimate excuse under s. 598(1) he was not entitled to a jury trial and the trial judge's credibility findings and application of the burden of proof contained no reviewable error; appeal dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C39501
- Parties
- Respondent: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN; Appellant: JODO IBRAHIM
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 18 January 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Right to Jury Trial, Non Appearance Under S. 598(1), Credibility Assessment, Burden of Proof, Trial by Judge Alone
- 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
JODO IBRAHIM
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether s. 598(1) precluded a jury trial absent establishment of a legitimate excuse for failure to appear
- 2 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing credibility or applying the burden of proof
Ratio Decidendi
Because the appellant never sought to establish a legitimate excuse under s. 598(1) he was not entitled to a jury trial and the trial judge's credibility findings and application of the burden of proof contained no reviewable error; appeal dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Ibrahim Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-01-18 Docket numbers C39501 Judges Doherty, David H.; Laskin, John Ivan; Feldman, Kathryn N. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20050118 DOCKET: C39501 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. JODO IBRAHIM (Appellant) BEFORE: DOHERTY, LASKIN and FELDMAN JJ.A. COUNSEL: Nathan Gorham for the appellant G. Choi for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: January 11, 2005 On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Peter A. Grossi of the Superior Court of Justice dated November 9, 2001. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] There was some confusion as to whether the accused should be tried by a judge alone or a judge and jury. We are satisfied that s. 598(1) precluded the appellant’s right to be tried by a judge and jury absent the appellant “establishing … a legitimate excuse” for his failure to appear at trial. The appellant at no time sought to establish a legitimate excuse for his non-appearance. He was not entitled to a jury trial and was properly tried by a judge alone. [2] The trial judge’s reasons reveal no error in his assessment of credibility or the application of the burden of proof. [3] The appeal is dismissed.