DAILY
CASE-EXTRACTS
Stay Current With all
Ontario and Canada
Appeal Court Dicta
|
|
Criminal - Summary Conviction Appeals [s.839]. R. v. Lloyd
In R. v. Lloyd (Ont CA, 2023) the Court of Appeal considered the SOR for a second summary conviction appeal:[14] The question of whether an appeal should be allowed to challenge a summary conviction judge’s assessment of the sufficiency of a trial judge’s reasons, is a question of law: R. v. Capano, 2014 ONCA 599, 314 C.C.C. (3d) 135; R. v. Ralph, 2008 NLCA 70, 281 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 324, at para. 14; R. v. Minuskin, 2003 CanLII 11604 (ON CA), 68 O.R. (3d) 577 (C.A.), at para. 3; and R. v. A.M., 2022 ONCA 154, 160 O.R. (3d) 561, at paras. 1 and 24. . R. v. Asemota
In R. v. Asemota (Ont CA, 2023) the Court of Appeal considered the threshold for leave to appeal a criminal summary conviction matter:[3] The threshold test for leave to appeal to this court on a summary conviction matter is high because it involves a request for a second appeal: R. v. R.R., 2008 ONCA 497, 90 O.R. (3d) 641. ... . R. v. Kuffuor
In R. v. Kuffuor (Ont CA, 2023) the Court of Appeal considers the test for granting leave to appeal in summary conviction matters:[2] The test for granting leave to appeal in a summary conviction matter is well-established. Leave should be granted sparingly, and it is restricted to a question of law alone. Two factors are generally considered: 1) the significance of the legal issues raised to the general administration of criminal justice, and 2) the merits of the proposed grounds of appeal: see R. v. R. (R.), 2008 ONCA 497, 90 O.R. (3d) 641. . R. v. Berhe
In R. v. Berhe (Ont CA, 2022) the Court of Appeal considered appeals from summary conviction matters:[9] Under s. 839(1), a court of appeal may grant leave to appeal from a decision of a summary conviction appeal court on a question of law alone. However, in R. v. R.(R.), 2008 ONCA 497, 90 O.R. (3d) 641, this court held that leave should be granted only sparingly, after a consideration of the significance of the legal errors raised to the general administration of justice, along with the merits of the proposed appeal.
|
