COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – EMAD ELGUINDY (Appellant)
BEFORE:
MACPHERSON, SIMMONS and CRONK JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Emad Elguindy
in-person
Michal Fairburn
for the respondent
HEARD
February 23, 2004
On appeal from the summary conviction appeal judgment of Justice John R. Belleghem of the Superior Court of Justice dismissing the appeal of the conviction entered on May 1, 2003 and the sentence given on August 7, 2003 by Justice Steven R. Clark of the Ontario Court of Justice.
A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T
1The appellant contends that Crown counsel’s reference to him before he arrived in court was prejudicial. We disagree. It was innocuous.
2He also contends that he was misled by four independent lawyers who mistakenly urged him not to testify on his own behalf. The fact that the appellant relied on the legal advice he received hardly renders his trial unfair.
3The appellant contends that the trial judge misapplied the definition of theft in s. 322 of the Code, that he failed to deal properly with conflicting evidence and that the conviction was unsafe and unreasonable. We disagree. The trial judge’s reasons are full, careful and fair.
4The appellant contends that there was inadequate disclosure of two of the three video tapes entered as exhibits. However, the transcript discloses that at the trial the appellant explicitly agreed to the admission of the tapes.
5The appeal is dismissed.
“J. C. MacPherson J.A.”
“Janet M. Simmons J.A.”
“E. A. Cronk J.A.”