Court of Appeal for Ontario
BEFORE: Goudge, Rouleau and Watt JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
Musab Saboon
Appellant
COUNSEL:
Craig Parry, for the appellant
Eric Siebenmorgen, for the respondent
Heard and released orally: October 22, 2012
On appeal from the conviction entered on August 20, 2010 by Justice Robert T. Weseloh of the Ontario of Justice, sitting without a jury.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1The appellant makes several arguments in this appeal. First, he says that the trial judge misapprehended evidence in finding that the appellant admitted he was part of a group surrounding the victims.
2We do not agree. The particular finding referred to is no more than that the appellant admitted he was present and part of the group, some of whom committed the robbery. That accurately reflects the appellant’s admission.
3Then the appellant says the trial judge erred in disregarding evidence that the appellant was separate from those robbing the victims.
4Again we disagree. There was ample evidence on which the trial judge based his conclusion that the appellant was part of the circle of intimidation. It was not necessary in this relatively simple trial for the trial judge to explicitly reject evidence to the contrary.
5Finally, the appellant says the trial judge misapprehended the evidence of Perez concerning whether the appellant’s hat had earflaps. While that may be so, it was an insignificant mistake. The victim McGuinty said his robber wore a distinctive hat with earflaps, and the appellant admitting wearing just such a hat. The Perez evidence was not essential to the trial judge’s reasoning or to his conclusion.
6In summary, there was ample evidence, including importantly, the appellant’s own admissions to conclude that there is nothing unsafe about the appellant’s conviction. The appeal must be dismissed.