Court File and Parties

CITATION: R. v. Cayenne, 2010 ONCA 755

DATE: 20101108

DOCKET: C51448

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Doherty, Feldman and Gillese JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

and

Ryon Noll Cayenne

Appellant

Counsel: Alison Craig, for the appellant Howard Piafsky, for the respondent

Heard: November 5, 2010 On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Epstein of the Ontario Court of Justice dated June 4, 2009 and the sentence imposed on September 16, 2009.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The main Crown witness recanted the statement she had given the police inculpating the appellant. Her testimony exonerated the appellant.

[2] After counsel had examined and cross-examined the witness, the trial judge questioned the witness for some five and a half pages of transcript.

[3] Counsel for the appellant argues that the questioning reveals that the trial judge had prejudged the witness’s credibility and, hence, the appellant’s guilt.

[4] The applicable legal principles are well known. Each case will turn on its own facts. The trial judge’s questions, especially those near the end of the exchange, indicate that the trial judge was troubled by the witness’s testimony. Indeed, there are obvious difficulties with her credibility. She was an admitted liar.

[5] We have given careful consideration to counsel’s arguments. Having regard to the manner and timing of the questions, the absence of any comment by counsel at trial, and the nature of the witness’s testimony, we are not persuaded that the trial judge’s questions demonstrate a prejudgment of the case.

[6] The appeal must be dismissed.