R. v. Pinder
The Court upheld the convictions because the trial judge properly applied the W.(D.) test, crediting objective corroboration and witness testimony, found the complainant credible, concluded the defence did not raise a reasonable doubt, and found the five‑year sentence fit for prolonged domestic violence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C41670
- Parties
- Appellant: LEROY PINDER; Respondent: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 25 October 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed as to conviction; leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal from sentence dismissed
- Legal Topics
- W.(d.) Rule, Credibility Findings, Reasonable Doubt, Sentence Appeal, Judicial Reasons Requirements
- 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
LEROY PINDER
Appellant
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge correctly applied the R. v. W.(D.) rule and the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt
- 2 Whether the defence evidence raised a reasonable doubt as to counts arising from the stabbing
- 3 Whether the five-year sentence for prolonged domestic violence was fit
Ratio Decidendi
The Court upheld the convictions because the trial judge properly applied the W.(D.) test, crediting objective corroboration and witness testimony, found the complainant credible, concluded the defence did not raise a reasonable doubt, and found the five‑year sentence fit for prolonged domestic violence.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed as to conviction; leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal from sentence dismissed
Orders
- Appeal from conviction dismissed
- Leave to appeal sentence granted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Pinder Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2006-10-25 Docket numbers C41670 Judges Laskin, John Ivan; Moldaver, Michael James; Juriansz, Russell G. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20061025 DOCKET: C41670 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – LEROY PINDER (Appellant) BEFORE: LASKIN, MOLDAVER and JURIANSZ JJ.A. COUNSEL: Jennifer Gleitman for the appellant Sandra Kingston for the respondent HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY: October 20, 2006 On appeal from the judgment of Justice John C. Kennedy of the Superior Court of Justice dated March 6, 2003. ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view, the reasons for judgment considered as a whole were adequate. We are satisfied that the trial judge applied the principle of R. v. W.(D.) (1991), 63 C.C.C. (3d) 397 (S.C.C.) and the correct standard of proof. The linchpin in the trial judge’s analysis related to counts 1-3 that arose out of the stabbing of the complainant. [2] The trial judge noted the objective evidence of the complainant’s cut shirt and the knife used confirmed the complainant’s testimony. The testimony of Ms. Cox and Ms. Lupo further buttressed his conclusion the event occurred as charged. The trial judge found the complainant to be credible and did not believe the appellant’s denials. He found the defence evidence did not raise a reasonable doubt. The trial judge’s rejection of the defence position was not conclusory and meets the requirement of R. v. Sheppard, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869. [3] Accordingly the appeal from conviction is dismissed. [4] In regard to sentence, this was a serious case of domestic violence that continued over a prolonged period of time. It warranted the five-year sentence imposed. Leave to appeal sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed. “J.I. Laskin J.A.” “M.J. Moldaver J.A.” “R.G. Juriansz J.A.”