COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DATE: 20000208

DOCKET: C27821

RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. PAUL HACHEY

(appellant)

BEFORE: OSBORNE A.C.J.O., LASKIN and BORINS JJ.A.

COUNSEL: Pierre Bradley

For the appellant

David Finley

For the respondent

HEARD: February 4, 2000

On appeal from conviction by L. Gauthier J. dated November 29,

1996

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellant abandoned his submission on the ineffective

assistance of his trial counsel. He therefore argued only two

grounds of appeal: first that the verdict was unreasonable; and

second that the trial judge erred by not granting a mistrial.

[2] On the first submission, although this was a circumstantial

case, in the light of the cumulative effect of the evidence,

particularly the pathologist’s opinion and the unsigned letter,

the verdict was one that a properly instructed trier of fact

could reasonably have rendered. This ground of appeal therefore

fails.

[3] On the appellant’s second submission, the trial judge did

not err in the exercise of her discretion to refuse a mistrial.

Nor did the two letters meet the Palmer criteria for

admissibility. The letter of March 21, 1995, which was before

the trial judge, referred to the two earlier examinations of the

victim’s brother discussed in the two letters now sought to be

admitted at trial. Defence counsel had an opportunity to explore

and did explore the matters raised in these letters.

Accordingly, this ground of appeal also fails.

[4] The appeal is therefore dismissed.

“C.A. Osborne A.C.J.O.” “J.I. Laskin J.A.” “S. Borins J.A.”