R. v. Moore
The appeal was dismissed because the Court found no error in the trial judge's evaluation of the evidence or credibility determinations; the verdict was not unreasonable and the judge could accept the Crown witness despite a prior inconsistent statement.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C41736
- Parties
- Appellant: Timothy J. Moore; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 2 November 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal Decision)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Credibility of Witnesses, Prior Inconsistent Statement, Unreasonable Verdict, Assessment of Evidence
- 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
Timothy J. Moore
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal Decision)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the reliability and credibility of the Crown witness
- 2 Whether the verdict was unreasonable in light of the witness's prior inconsistent statement
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the Court found no error in the trial judge's evaluation of the evidence or credibility determinations; the verdict was not unreasonable and the judge could accept the Crown witness despite a prior inconsistent statement.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Moore Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2004-11-02 Docket numbers C41736 Judges Doherty, David H.; Weiler, Karen Merle Magnuson; Simmons, Janet M. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20041102 DOCKET: C41736 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. TIMOTHY J. MOORE (Appellant) BEFORE: DOHERTY, WEILER and SIMMONS JJ.A. COUNSEL: Brian Kelly for the appellant Roger A. Pinnock for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: November 1, 2004 On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice R.G. Hunter of the Ontario Court of Justice dated August 27, 2003. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We find no error in the trial judge’s review of the evidence or his assessment of the reliability/credibility of the Crown witness. [2] The S.C.A.C.J. concluded that the verdict was not unreasonable. We have considered the evidence and agree that it was open to the trial judge to accept the evidence of the Crown witness even though that witness had given a prior inconsistent statement. [3] The appeal is dismissed.