R. v. Costa
The trial judge properly concluded the complainant was competent; the isolated inconsistency with the victim impact statement could not reasonably have affected the verdict given the judge's findings and confirmatory evidence; the appellant's account remained incredible; the sentence imposed was fit and not open to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C29347
- Parties
- Appellant: Salvatore Costa; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 January 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Conviction and Sentence Appeal
- Outcome
- Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Witness Competence, S.16 Hearing, Victim Impact Statement, Credibility, Appellate Deference, Sentence 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
Salvatore Costa
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Conviction and Sentence Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the complainant was competent to testify under oath following a s.16 hearing
- 2 Whether an apparent inconsistency between the victim impact statement and testimony warranted setting aside the conviction
- 3 Whether assumed prior acquaintance would have made the appellant's evidence credible
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge properly concluded the complainant was competent; the isolated inconsistency with the victim impact statement could not reasonably have affected the verdict given the judge's findings and confirmatory evidence; the appellant's account remained incredible; the sentence imposed was fit and not open to appellate interference.
Court Disposition
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed
Orders
- Conviction appeal dismissed
- Leave to appeal sentence granted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Costa Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 1999-01-12 Docket numbers C29347 Judges Doherty, David H.; Rosenberg, Marc; O’Connor, Dennis Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 19990112 DOCKET: C29347 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. SALVATORE COSTA (Appellant) BEFORE: DOHERTY, ROSENBERG and O'CONNOR JJ.A. COUNSEL: Paul W. Slocombe for the appellant Laurie Lacelle for the respondent HEARD: January 7, 1999 ENDORSEMENT The Conviction Appeal [1] The competence of the complainant to testify was canvassed in a s. 16 hearing before the witness was sworn. The evidence given by the complainant, a mentally handicapped, middle-aged man, provided an adequate basis for the trial judge's conclusion that the complainant was competent to testify under oath. The complainant's acknowledgement that he spoke to his caregivers at a break concerning an issue on which he was being cross-examined does not, standing alone, suggest any incapacity on his part. [2] The trial judge's ruling that an apparent inconsistency between a comment in the victim impact statement and the complainant's testimony concerning his prior acquaintance with the appellant did not warrant setting aside the conviction, was a proper exercise of his discretion. Given the trial judge's finding with respect to the reliability of the complainant's evidence on matters other than those critical to the complaint and the overwhelming nature of the confirmatory evidence, we see no basis upon which the comment in the victim impact statement could reasonably have affected the result. Nor can we accept the appellant's submission that if one assumes the complainant would have testified as set out in the victim impact statement, that testimony would have rendered the appellant's evidence credible. The appellant's story was quite incredible and remained so whether or not the complainant had some prior acquaintance with the appellant. The conviction appeal is dismissed. The Sentence Appeal [3] In our view, the sentence imposed by the trial judge was entirely fit and we see no basis upon which we can interfere. [4] Leave to appeal sentence is granted, but the sentence appeal is dismissed.