R. v. Anglade, 2007 ONCA 431

1The crown concedes that the trial judge erred by relying on hearsay evidence that emerged from the appellant’s cross‑examination of the victim. We agree with the Crown that this is a case to apply the curative proviso. Putting to one side the impugned evidence, conviction on the remaining evidence was inevitable. The victim, who was unharmed prior to the altercation, received a wound during the altercation, requiring an overnight stay in the hospital and two stitches to close. Based on this evidence it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the victim’s injury, was caused by the appellant using a weapon.

2As for the sentence, it was more than double the sentence requested by the trial Crown. In our view, a sentence of forty-eight months is outside the acceptable range for this offence. The appellant has served the equivalent of thirty‑two months. Accordingly, we would grant leave to appeal, allow the appeal and vary the sentence to time served.

3We would dismiss the appeal from conviction.