R. v. Suarez
Except for a single, harmless misapprehension conceded by the Crown, the trial judge's credibility findings and inferences (including on the burn and application of the W.(D.) steps) were within his province; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2008 ONCA 824
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Jorge Suarez
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 December 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Witness Credibility, Misapprehension of Evidence, W.(d.) Analysis, Appeal Against Conviction, Sentence Appeal
- 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
Jorge Suarez
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge misapprehended the evidence of witness Corey Suarez such that a new trial is required
- 2 Whether the trial judge erred in drawing a conclusion about the source of the burn
- 3 Whether the trial judge properly applied the W.(D.) steps in assessing evidence
Ratio Decidendi
Except for a single, harmless misapprehension conceded by the Crown, the trial judge's credibility findings and inferences (including on the burn and application of the W.(D.) steps) were within his province; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Sentence appeal abandoned
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Suarez Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2008-12-09 Neutral citation 2008 ONCA 824 Docket numbers C47899 Judges Goudge, Stephen Thomas; MacFarland, Jean Louise; Watt, David Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Suarez, 2008 ONCA 824 DATE: 20081209 DOCKET: C47899 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Goudge, MacFarland and Watt JJ.A. BETWEEN: Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Jorge Suarez Appellant Lawrence Greenspon for the appellant Brad Greenshields for the respondent Heard: November 28, 2008 On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Paul F. Lalonde of the Superior Court of Justice dated May 28, 2007 and from the sentence imposed by Justice Lalonde dated October 19, 2007. ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant raises a number of instances in which he says that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence of Corey Suarez in assessing his credibility and that this warrants, at the least, a new trial. In our view, with one exception conceded by the Crown, the findings of the trial judge do not reflect any misapprehension of the evidence, rather constitute findings he was entitled to make in light of the inconsistencies in Corey’s evidence or conclusions he was entitled to come to having heard Corey’s testimony. The one misapprehension, concerning Corey’ use of the word “affectionate” and its use by others, is innocuous since his ultimate conclusion, that Corey’s use of the word points to his having been rehearsed, is derived not from who else used the word but from the limits of Corey’s own vocabulary. This ground of appeal fails. [2] The appellant’s complaint about the trial judge’s finding on the possible source of the burn, given its characteristics, must also fail. The appellant’s trial counsel invited the trial judge to draw a conclusion on this issue; and, given common experience, it was not inappropriate for the trial judge to do so. [3] Finally, the W.D. argument must also fail. The trial judge was well aware of the steps it requires and there is no basis upon which to find that he reached his conclusion without taking them. [4] The sentence appeal is abandoned. [5] The appeal is dismissed. “S.T. Goudge J.A.” “J. MacFarland J.A.” “David Watt J.A.”