R. v. Mohamad
Leave to appeal was denied because, even assuming arguable legal errors, the evidence against the appellant was overwhelming and there was no possibility that a reasonable trier of fact would have acquitted him.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2013 NSCA 104
- Parties
- Appellant: Mustafa (Steve) Mohamad; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 18 September 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal Application
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal denied.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Summary Conviction, Overwhelming Evidence, Standard of Review
- 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
Mustafa (Steve) Mohamad
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted
- 2 Whether putative errors of law could have produced an acquittal
- 3 Whether the strength of the evidence defeats an arguable legal error
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was denied because, even assuming arguable legal errors, the evidence against the appellant was overwhelming and there was no possibility that a reasonable trier of fact would have acquitted him.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal denied.
Orders
- Leave to appeal denied.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Mohamad Court Court of Appeal Date 2013-09-18 Citation 2013 NSCA 104 Docket CAC 409515 Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Hamilton, M. Jill (Honourable Justice); Beveridge, Duncan R. (Honourable Justice) (CA); Bryson, Peter M.S. (Honourable Justice) (CA) Document Type Decision Decision Content Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Citation: R. v. Mohamad, 2013 NSCA 104 Date: 20130918 Docket: CAC 409515 Registry: Halifax Between: Mustafa (Steve) Mohamad Appellant v. Her Majesty the Queen Respondent Judges: Hamilton, Beveridge and Bryson, JJ.A. Appeal Heard: September 18, 2013, in Halifax, Nova Scotia Written Release: September 19, 2013 Held: Leave to appeal denied, per oral reasons for judgment of Beveridge, J.A.; Hamilton and Bryson, JJ.A. concurring. Counsel: Jim O’Neil, for the appellant Jill Hartlen, for the respondent Reasons for judgment: (Orally) [1] We are of the unanimous view that leave to appeal be denied. The denial of leave in this case should not be viewed as necessarily endorsing all of the legal reasoning of the summary conviction appeal court or of the trial judge. Even assuming an arguable error of law, the case against the appellant was overwhelming. We are satisfied there is no possibility, absent the putative legal errors, that a reasonable trier of fact would have acquitted the appellant. [2] Accordingly, leave to appeal is denied. Beveridge, J.A. Concurred in: Hamilton, J.A. Bryson, J.A.