The appellant appealed a conviction for common assault and the sentence imposed following a trial in the Ontario Court of Justice.
The appellant argued that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence, failed to address inconsistencies between the complainant and a police witness, and inadequately explained the rejection of the appellant’s evidence.
The summary conviction appeal court held that the trial judge properly assessed the evidence and reasonably relied on the independent observations of a police officer who witnessed the incident.
The court found that the trial judge applied the correct standard of proof consistent with the framework in R. v. W.D. and made no error in principle in sentencing.
The appeal from both conviction and sentence was dismissed.
