R. v. Fonseca
The trial judge did not base disbelief on the appellant's silence but on the contrast between the appellant's trial evidence and a prior, different statement given at the scene and the appellant's explanation for that false statement; this was a permissible basis for disbelieving the appellant and the appeal is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 ONCA 473
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Jose Fonseca
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 22 June 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Silence at Trial, Credibility Assessment, Prior Inconsistent Statements
- 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
Jose Fonseca
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge impermissibly relied on the appellant's silence in disbelieving his evidence
- 2 Whether the trial judge properly relied on the contrast between the appellant's trial evidence and his prior statement at the scene
- 3 Whether the conviction and sentence should be overturned on appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge did not base disbelief on the appellant's silence but on the contrast between the appellant's trial evidence and a prior, different statement given at the scene and the appellant's explanation for that false statement; this was a permissible basis for disbelieving the appellant and the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Fonseca Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2011-06-22 Neutral citation 2011 ONCA 473 Docket numbers C52607 Judges Goudge, Stephen Thomas; Juriansz, Russell G.; MacFarland, Jean Louise Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Fonseca, 2011 ONCA 473 DATE: 20110622 DOCKET: C52607 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Goudge, Juriansz and MacFarland JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Jose Fonseca Appellant Christopher Hicks and Kristin Bailey, for the appellant Joan Barrett, for the respondent Heard: June 20, 2011 On appeal from the conviction entered on April 7 and May 7, 2010, and the sentence imposed on May 11, 2010, by Justice Lawrence Klein of the Ontario Court of Justice. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view the trial judge did not use the appellant’s silence as a basis for his disbelief of the appellant’s evidence. Rather he contrasted the appellant’s explanation for the accident given at trial with his very different story given at the scene – a story he has since rejected – and his explanation for giving that false story. The trial judge did not err in using this contrast as a basis for disbelieving the appellant’s evidence. [2] The appeal is dismissed. “S.T. Goudge J.A.”