DATE: 20050215

DOCKET: C41159

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. EUGENE HOLLETT ( Appellant)

BEFORE:

MCMURTRY C.J.O., DOHERTY and MACFARLAND JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Tanya Kranjc

for the appellant

Amy Alyea

for the respondent

HEARD & ENDORSED:

February 11, 2005

On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice O’Neill of the Superior Court of Justice dated September 26, 2003.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The trial judge’s reasons provide a detailed review of the evidence and set out the legal principles applicable to the charges. The different verdicts arrived at by the trial judge demonstrate a careful appreciation of the evidence and the differences in the evidence as it related to the various counts.

[2] In the course of his reasons on count two, the count on which the judge convicted, the trial judge found that the appellant undertook to look after and protect the complainant when her mother moved away. The trial judge next found that the living arrangements, whereby the complainant was entirely dependent on the appellant for food, shelter and necessities, made the complainant “particularly vulnerable to the appellant’s influence.” These findings of fact were open to the trial judge on the evidence and warranted a conviction on count two.

[3] We see no merit to the appeal from the assault conviction. The appeal is dismissed.