R. v. Nguyen
The Court held the trial judge did not err: he lawfully applied the Kowlyk principle by considering all circumstances in assessing recent possession and properly applied the W.D. test, rejected the appellants' explanations as not raising a reasonable doubt, and therefore the convictions were supported by the evidence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2013 ONCA 588
- Parties
- Appellant: Thuy Thi Nguyen; Appellant: Xuan Hoa Le; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 30 September 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld
- Legal Topics
- Recent Possession Doctrine, W.d. Test, Reasonable Doubt, Application of R. V. Kowlyk
- 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
Thuy Thi Nguyen
Appellant
Xuan Hoa Le
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in applying the doctrine of recent possession by applying a reasonableness analysis to items not directly explaining possession
- 2 Whether the trial judge misapplied R. v. W.D. and failed to properly apply the second step of that analysis
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held the trial judge did not err: he lawfully applied the Kowlyk principle by considering all circumstances in assessing recent possession and properly applied the W.D. test, rejected the appellants' explanations as not raising a reasonable doubt, and therefore the convictions were supported by the evidence.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Nguyen Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2013-09-30 Neutral citation 2013 ONCA 588 Docket numbers C53007, C53008 Judges Feldman, Kathryn N.; Tulloch, Michael H.; Lauwers, Peter D. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Nguyen, 2013 ONCA 588 DATE: 20130926 DOCKET: C53007 and C53008 Feldman, Tulloch and Lauwers JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Thuy Thi Nguyen and Xuan Hoa Le Appellants Gordon Akilie, for the appellants Michael Perlin, for the respondent Heard: September 19, 2013 On appeal from the conviction entered on July 28, 2010 by Justice H.L. Fraser of the Ontario Court of Justice. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellants raise two grounds of appeal. [2] The first is that the trial judge erred in his application of the doctrine of recent possession by applying the reasonableness analysis to items of evidence (such as the break and enter tools) that were not directly the explanation for the possession of the stolen goods. [3] We do not agree that the trial judge made an error in this regard. He applied the law as set out in para. 12 of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada R. v. Kowlyk 1988 2 SCR 59. That law requires the trial judge to consider all the circumstances to decide if the inference of knowing possession or theft or both is available. [4] The second argument is that the trial judge misapplied W.D. and did not properly apply the second step in the analysis. Again, we do not agree. The trial judge considered the evidence of the appellant in the context of all of the evidence and rejected it. It is clear that he concluded that it did not raise a reasonable doubt. He was satisfied on the evidence he did accept that the three offences had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. [5] The appeal is therefore dismissed.